Meeting minutes
align-x-center - w3c/epub-specs#2847
wendyreid: we want to talk about whether this is only for fixed layout
duga: literally everyone wants to obsolete this, can we take a resolution?
mgarrish: I’ve heard two options, deprecating it or outdate it?
shiestyle: I think property is regressive from Japan many years ago
only a few reading systems support it, publishers rarely use it
… I propose to move to either status
ivan: the question is will any book that has this property be flagged with an error?
shiestyle: I think this feature is rarely used, so it is OK to throw an error
… deprecated is fine
toshiakikoike, tanslated by shiestyle to English from Japanese
… this property was proposed by Koike-san and Ishii-san many years ago
… it is not a problem if this is deprecated
wendyreid: I wonder if this will result in a flood of errors for legacy books
ivan: it seems this is not a problem
<wendyreid> PROPOSED: Deprecate 'align-x-center' in EPUB 3.4.
<ivan> +1
<toshiakikoike> +1
<duga> +1
<SueNeu> +1
<shiestyle> +1
<mgarrish> +1
<MasakazuKitahara> +1
<wendyreid> +1
<rdeltour> +1
<GeorgeK> +1
<LaurentLM> +1
<CharlesL1> +1
<DaleRogers> +1
<Hadrien> +1
<gautierchomel> +1
RESOLUTION: Deprecate 'align-x-center' in EPUB 3.4.
introductionn of grigoriy
wendyreid: I would like to invite [grigoriy] to introduce himself
gman: I was invited by Gautier as a representative of French publishing
… my specialty is educational texts and converting them to Ebooks
Reorganized layout section - w3c/epub-specs#2844
ivan: there are over 100 comments
mgarrish: We were looking at the initial start page, what should happen when there is no spread placement on the first spine item
… we decided we should display it centered in the viewscreen or slotting the page on its own however that best works
… we have a note to make an equivalent in rolled layouts
Hadrien: There was a discussion also about the first resource when there isn’t spread information
… there was a discussion with Roman about other things
mgarrish: The issue with Roman was whether this should be a MUST
… this removes a normative requirement that was untestable
… I think this works in this case because this is an authoring suggestion
… it would be good to move forward since we have a lot of issues in the PR
ivan: it should be merged as soon as possible
<gman> Hadrien my nickname is the first letter of my first name and 3 first letters of my last name, which makes a half-life reference, how blessed can one be :)
ivan: we said we would add a not whereby it is possible to make this in an FXL
mgarrish: it is in the discussion about fixed-layout documents
… and in the icb section it says if you are using these, then the reading system will pick it up
ivan: this should be merged as soon as possible followed by a revamping of the test cases in the new year
duga: we should submit this asap, there are 100 comments on the PR
… many of them have nothing to do with reorganization
… I don’t think this is a good workflow, we are doing real, unrelated editing in this PR
… if you see something in a PR that isn’t related to the PR, they should open a separate issue
… and I suggest mgarrish pushback on this
… obviously somethings would be easier to do at the same time,
… but we’ve made so many normative changes in this PR I don’t think I’ve responded to them all
… but mgarrish should ask others to open the PR, not be responsible for that himself
mgarrish: I agree this one got out of control
wendyreid: noted for the future, don’t make mgarrish do so many things in one PR
… I think we are all agreed to merge this as soon as possilbe
<wendyreid> PROPOSED: Merge PR #2844
<mgarrish> +1
<wendyreid> +1
<ivan> +1
<rdeltour> +1
<toshiakikoike> +1
<shiestyle> +1
<Hadrien> +1
<CharlesL1> +1
<gautierchomel> +1
<MasakazuKitahara> +1
shiestyle: thank you mgarrish for including a note for Japanese rolled comics
<SueNeu> +1
RESOLUTION: Merge PR #2844
<duga> +1
wendyreid: the big task now will be the tests that need to be edited and renamed
ivan: I have created a test file with images in the spine
Hadrien: thank you ivan for the example of images in the spine, I will create a few more
… these will be used by engineers in Thorium to test presentation
… we expect implementation on IOS and Readium Mobile
AOB
ivan: I was looking at the charter, and the only outstanding standardization issue is annotations
… we know that is going on. I have the impression that more small issues are going on
… so the next step would be to go to the candidate step
… that would begin the horizontal reviews.
… we should organize ourselves to do these over the winter
… we need some volunteers to take parts of the spec to the relevant group
Hadrien: on the comics side we have talked about thngs like group notes
… I still have an issue with the structural semantics
… I don’t think these would block going forward
ivan: I was focusing on the normative parts
… the main question is who will do the horizontal reviews?
wendyreid: we have to do horizontal reviews for security, privacy, internationalization, accessibility, TAG
ivan: there are forms we need to fill out
… most of the time these reviews don’t result in changes
… it would be worth telling people what changes were made
… maybe with a small wiki
… we didn’t do an enormous amount of normative changes
… we deprecated a few things
… we could mention looking into html and deciding not to make that change
wendyreid: we will need to add to the change log
ivan: perhaps we should filter it out, some of those changes are editorial
mgarrish: we could filter the change log, and try to organize them by security, privacy, etc
ivan: my guess is that we didn’t make may changes that require review
ivan: maybe web assembly will bring up security issue
Dale
DaleRogers: is there a resource for learning more about horizontal reviews?
<wendyreid> https://
mgarrish: basically there are experts within W3C who will look at what you’ve done to see if there are issues that come up
… adding more checks and balances
wendyreid: they are experts in security or privacy, not necessarily in EPUB
… the last time we did this we learned a lot
CharlesL1: in accessibility we added in the date of the review
wendyreid: I think this should be pretty straightforward since we’ve done this recently
… think about how we will do this over the holidays
<DaleRogers> Sue: Last name is spelled Rogers. So the minutes pick it up.
wendyreid: we are just looking for someone to own the process, you don’t have be an expert in the particular specialty
<CharlesL1> S/DaleRodgers/DaleRogers
GeorgeK1: I imagine the accessibility task force will manage the accessibility review
duga: how does the new annotation spec figure into this?
… it might have significant safety and privacy issues
ivan: we agreed that we would move to a recommendation for annotation specs
… we will eventually need to have that reviewed as welll
… for now let’s set that aside. But that is different than the others
… as soon as there is a public working draft, we should reach out to the others
… it has to happen separately from the authoring spec and reading system
… the annotations will a big horizontal review
duga: if someone volunteers for something, are they volunteering for the easy stuff or the annotations?
LaurentLM: ivan, what happens when we talk about internationalization, etc when we talk about annotations?
ivan: in 3.3, we focused on things that are only EPUB specific
wendyreid: are there any other topics to bring up before we wrap up for the year?
… our next meeting is January 8. I hope everyone has a lovely holiday season.
… see you in the new year