15:45:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwg
15:45:08 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/08/21-pwg-irc
15:45:09 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
15:45:09 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Working Group Telco
15:45:09 <ivan> Chair: Garth, Tzviya
15:45:09 <ivan> Date: 2017-08-21
15:45:09 <ivan> Regrets+ cmaden2, marisademeglio, ReinaldoFerraz, pkra, billm
15:45:09 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2017Aug/0135.html
15:45:10 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2017Aug/0135.html
15:49:23 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pwg
15:52:15 <circ-user-JzU0B> circ-user-JzU0B has joined #pwg
15:53:03 <ivan> present+
15:56:26 <jun_gamo> jun_gamo has joined #pwg
15:56:33 <laudrain> laudrain has joined #pwg
15:56:37 <baldurbjarnason> baldurbjarnason has joined #pwg
15:56:38 <Avneesh> present+ Avneesh
15:56:42 <baldurbjarnason> present+
15:57:02 <ivan> present+ luc
15:57:20 <bigbluehat> present+
15:57:37 <ivan> present+ jeffp
15:58:25 <ivan> present+ jun_gamo
15:58:36 <Rachel> Rachel has joined #pwg
15:58:40 <ivan> present+ rachel
15:58:40 <Rachel> present+
15:58:48 <jeffp> What's the email I should send my github to?
15:59:13 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #pwg
15:59:31 <tzviya> present+
15:59:39 <rkwright> present +
16:00:20 <leonardr> leonardr has joined #pwg
16:00:25 <leonardr> present+ Leonard
16:01:26 <mattg> present+
16:01:53 <timCole> timCole has joined #pwg
16:02:11 <rdeltour> present+
16:02:15 <clapierre> clapierre has joined #pwg
16:02:23 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #pwg
16:02:25 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pwg
16:02:31 <laurentlemeur> present+
16:02:44 <ivan> scribenick: jeffp
16:02:47 <timCole> present+ Tim_Cole
16:02:50 <jeffp> scribing
16:03:16 <BenSchroeter> BenSchroeter has joined #pwg
16:03:18 <clapierre> present+
16:03:29 <tzviya> https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2017/2017-08-14-minutes
16:03:31 <rdeltour> q+
16:03:36 <BenSchroeter> present+
16:03:37 <ivan> Topic: last minutes
16:03:39 <Leslie> Leslie has joined #pwg
16:03:39 <tzviya> ack r
16:03:43 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+
16:03:57 <jeffp> tzviya: Comments on last week's meeting?
16:04:46 <ivan> resolved: last week's minutes approved
16:04:52 <ivan> present+ George
16:04:54 <jeffp> ... next item, welcome to new members
16:05:05 <jeffp> ... no new members on call
16:05:18 <ivan> present+ yuri
16:05:49 <George> George has joined #pwg
16:06:05 <jeffp> [various noises]
16:06:08 <garth> garth has joined #pwg
16:06:09 <George> present+ George
16:06:17 <garth> present+ Garth
16:06:31 <jeffp> tzviya: Moving along, a number of things to cover today
16:06:53 <ivan> Topic: Dave & Benjamin's HTML TOC as manifest proposal
16:07:04 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/35
16:07:28 <jeffp> ... Let's take a look, Dave wisely went on vacation after sending this out, Benjamin please give an overview
16:07:41 <duga> duga has joined #pwg
16:07:45 <jeffp> BenSchroeter: What dave and I wrote up was a basis for using HTML as a binding document
16:07:55 <duga> present+
16:08:08 <ivan> s/BenSchroeter/bigbluehat/
16:08:28 <jeffp> ... By referencing just primary resource you could get the boundaries of a publication and the browser has enough builtin tooling to bring in secondary resources/dependencies and thereby offline the whole thing
16:08:52 <harriett> harriett has joined #pwg
16:08:53 <rkwright> muting in GTM: https://support.citrixonline.com/en_US/Meeting/help_files/G2M050045
16:08:56 <harriett> +present
16:09:10 <jeffp> ... My contribution was a proof of concept that it could be done. IT brings a number of publications in, in including an audiobook. It can grab the primary resource and retrieve them for offline consumption.
16:09:52 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pwg
16:09:53 <jeffp> ... Using service workers to update the local cache to maintain a local copy of the remote resource. Including notification for updates to the retrieved data.
16:09:55 <bigbluehat> https://dauwhe.github.io/html-first/
16:10:01 <Hadrien> present+
16:10:06 <bigbluehat> https://dauwhe.github.io/html-first/#demo-books
16:10:20 <jeffp> ... There's a demo section where you can try demoing public domain books using this system
16:10:23 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/35
16:10:31 <tzviya> q?
16:10:33 <jeffp> ... Issue #35 contains the proposal
16:10:41 <leonardr> q+
16:10:42 <jeffp> ... No comments thus far
16:10:58 <tzviya> ack l
16:10:59 <jeffp> ... Add comments and feedback to the above linked issue.
16:11:06 <garth> q?
16:11:43 <jeffp> leonardr: Interesting conversations already happening in the comments of the issue
16:11:45 <ivan> q+
16:12:53 <tzviya> ack iv
16:12:58 <jeffp> garth: There are a handful of high level issues wit this approach raised by myself and adrian as well as higher level comments about using HTML for this kind of purpose. This is a fundamental direction and there is a competing fundamental direction and I don't know how to drive this toward consensus. Ivan is in the queue and he should see a clear path through this
16:13:41 <jeffp> ivan: My personal conclusion is that to use the HTML manifest in general and TOC in particular as an exclusive syntax for the manifest is not necessarily the way we should go
16:14:01 <Bill_Kasdorf> q+
16:14:11 <jeffp> ... The issue we didn't discuss is what happens to other manifest items.
16:14:32 <jeffp> ... If we go the other way and the only other avenue we have is to basically do things in JSON
16:14:58 <jeffp> ... We have already discussed in general if we use JSON we have a number of fallback cases where the  info is not present in JSON but maybe be available in HTML
16:15:49 <garth> q?
16:15:50 <jeffp> ... I  see the HTML manifest as a fall back for use in those cases. I would propose we go ahead with some form of JSON (which format is a separate discussion). While we're doing that we'll have to talk about what kind of data can and can't be encoded in the JSON manifest and what should the fallback target be
16:15:51 <tzviya> ack bi
16:16:04 <bigbluehat> q+
16:16:27 <leonardr> q+
16:16:39 <jeffp> Bill_Kasdorf: Comment re: How descriptive vs how accommodating we can be. We should aim to be as accommodating as possible. Are there cases where this is sufficient?
16:17:04 <Bill_Kasdorf> s/descriptive/prescriptive
16:18:00 <garth> q?
16:18:02 <tzviya> ack bi
16:18:05 <timCole> q+
16:18:10 <jeffp> garth: For simple publications we could perhaps provide a fallback to HTML, Ivan's solution is a good way of "splitting the baby
16:19:05 <jeffp> ... re: marcos's contribution about JSON and the web app manifest. Summed up well in issue #7
16:19:43 <jeffp> ... web app manifest is additive information that isn't used by the browser rather provided to the browser API to create universal windows platform apps or install an icon on your home screen which is a shortcut to chrome without the UI
16:20:00 <ivan> s/... re/bigbluehat/
16:20:31 <garth> q?
16:20:45 <jeffp> ... it is entirely additive information, secondary to the primary information. Our JSON must be authoritative, exhaustive and contain all the dependencies as well as accounting for what happens when resources are unavailable.
16:21:00 <rdeltour> q+ on behalf of Yuri
16:21:05 <jeffp> ... Garth the issue you mentioned was potentially spidering wikipedia
16:22:02 <jeffp> ... If you reference wikipedia it will get only that one article and not all related links. We could add specification about what should be gathered for offline use but at this point you can't get stuff off other people's sites even if you add it as a primary resource
16:22:21 <garth> q?
16:22:29 <jeffp> ... The issue is less about the serialization format and more about the type of info we're encoding
16:22:54 <jeffp> ivan: More an admin comment, let's separate between two different questions.
16:23:14 <jeffp> ... 1) We propose to use HTML to encode the data
16:24:50 <david_stroup> david_stroup has joined #pwg
16:25:04 <jeffp> [scribe note] ivan I don't completely understand the dimensions of these questions to distill them
16:25:52 <Bill_Kasdorf> q+
16:25:56 <jeffp> Let's move through the queue and circle back
16:25:57 <tzviya> ack l
16:26:45 <ivan> q+
16:26:49 <laurentlemeur> q+
16:26:58 <jeffp> leonardr: Back to Bill_Kasdorf's comment about serialization, it made me wonder whether or not we needed a single mandatory serialization, or maybe there are multiple serialization for different use cases. We've had arguments in favor of JSON and HTML, we should keep in mind multiple options.
16:27:44 <tzviya> ack  tim
16:27:51 <baldurbjarnason> Just want to note that having multiple serialisations is an interoperability and adoption nightmare.
16:27:53 <jeffp> garth: We have to have a place that is the root, HTML vs JSON we could argue a long time. I have a little trouble with multiple choice there. I wouldn't have a problem with an agreed route with fallbacks but multiple choice could be a problematic design philosophy
16:28:20 <tzviya> +1 to Tim
16:28:34 <jeffp> timCole: The html avenue is a little premature, minimum manifest vs maximum manifest, manifest vs toc, manifest vs reading order. Are the separate or can the be conflated.
16:28:40 <bigbluehat> +1 to Tim also. Big issues first. Serialization second (perhaps even last)
16:28:52 <ivan> q+
16:29:36 <jeffp> ... It doesn't seem that complicated to offer multiple serializations for a minimum manifest but for a complex manifest it becomes more complicated to offer multiple serialization options.
16:29:46 <George> George's 2 cents is that one way of doing things is good.
16:30:17 <jeffp> tzviya: We seem to be agreeing that this proposal is preliminary we should spend this time discussing other issue in the queue
16:30:33 <laurentlemeur> q-
16:31:17 <rdeltour> ack rd
16:31:17 <Zakim> rdeltour, you wanted to comment on behalf of Yuri
16:31:25 <garth> q?
16:31:28 <jeffp> Yuri: My note is that we should take into account the implementation and development that are going on already (epub3 readers) using JSON manifest
16:31:35 <garth> ack Bill
16:32:27 <bigbluehat> q+
16:32:35 <jeffp> Bill_Kasdorf: I think that it would be helpful instead of considering this a proposal consider it as an ongoing Proof of Concept. Dave and Benjamin have a working model to show whether HTML can accomplish it or not. It's very useful work they have done, it's a good way for us to test this particular syntax as the definition of manifest evolves
16:32:49 <jeffp> ivan: Admin issue, are we now talking about serialization or something else?
16:33:10 <tzviya> ack iv
16:33:13 <jeffp> garth: I was unclear on the request, I thought we were in semi-agreement on the manifest
16:33:20 <leonardr> @garth - no, we are not there...
16:33:39 <jeffp> ivan: We are not yet complete
16:34:32 <jeffp> leonardr: We're not there yet because we haven't sorted out what belongs in the manifest and what doesn't and we're nowhere near deciding what belongs in the manifest
16:35:29 <tzviya> https://s3.amazonaws.com/pr-preview/mattgarrish/wpub/master.html
16:35:58 <tzviya> q?
16:36:04 <jeffp> jeffp has joined #pwg
16:36:21 <jeffp> leonardr: It's not clear that we should be talking serialization if we don't know what we're serializing
16:36:35 <bigbluehat> https://s3.amazonaws.com/pr-preview/mattgarrish/wpub/master.html#infoset-req
16:36:57 <leonardr> q+
16:36:57 <garth> q?
16:37:07 <tzviya> ack bi
16:37:20 <jeffp> garth: Specifically I would like folks to look at section 3.2
16:38:03 <jeffp> leonardr: This is a list that we all agreed were important we just haven't agreed on musts vs shoulds.
16:38:31 <jeffp> ... Some of these are even more subtle. eg. #2, it's unclear whether the language of the manifest is the language of the publication or the language of the manifest.
16:38:40 <timCole> q+
16:38:41 <ivan> q+
16:38:46 <tzviya> ack le
16:38:48 <garth> q?
16:38:55 <jeffp> ... I think we need some more time to nail down what the MVP of the manifest is then we can start serialization
16:39:20 <garth> q?
16:39:34 <jeffp> tzviya: Add comments to the particular draft to make remarks about the proposed language used.
16:40:01 <garth> q?
16:40:21 <baldurbjarnason> A lot of the extant issues are IMO serialisation issues: i.e. where the data belongs, how it is expressed, where the UA should look for it, how to deal with incompleteness or incorrectness.
16:40:22 <leonardr> @tzviya - where you would like the text comments?  In new github issues that are duplicative of the existing (unresolved) ones?
16:40:27 <jeffp> bigbluehat: The github page details what is built in to the document. The target audience of the HTML proposal is the browser because if you give the browser JSON data it doesn't know what to do with it but if you give browser HTML it renders it even if you add more data to it.
16:40:37 <garth> Then Tzviya can drive us back to Marcos’ comments, perhaps.
16:41:09 <tzviya> zakim, close the queue
16:41:09 <Zakim> ok, tzviya, the speaker queue is closed
16:41:24 <tzviya> q?
16:41:46 <jeffp> ... The target audience has been the browser, I just want to make sure that whatever serialization we decide on we keep the browser in mind. JSON is used in browsers but if you load it directly in a browser it chokes. Javascript is the consumer of json, not the browser
16:42:28 <tzviya> ack tim
16:42:57 <tzviya> ack iv
16:42:58 <garth> ack ivan
16:42:59 <jeffp> timCole: I'm not comfortable specifying a serialization format until we know whether the manifest format can handle the types of data we may want to include in the infoset longterm
16:42:59 <bigbluehat> +1 to Tim's cart/horse concerns about infoset and seralizations
16:43:19 <Bill_Kasdorf> We need to be careful not to confuse whether something is a "should" for the manifest vs. a "should" for the publication. A TOC, for example, can be a "must" for the publication but a "should" or "may" for the manifest.
16:43:52 <Bill_Kasdorf> . . . the manifest might just point to the TOC, not contain it.
16:44:16 <Bill_Kasdorf> . . . that is may or may not contain it.
16:44:28 <jeffp> ivan: semi-administrative comment, let's try to focus on our goals and significant milestones. The goal is to have a first working draft at the end of the year. it's important to have a working draft that puts down the significant milestones of what we want to do even if they're not completely polished. This may help new members etc decide to join or not, talking about the browser makers here who are not represented in the wg
16:44:47 <laurentlemeur> @Bill_Kasdorf, this is what the spec tends to express via the section "infoset" (-> publication) vs "manifest" (-> a specific structure)
16:45:11 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1
16:45:17 <laurentlemeur> q+
16:45:54 <jeffp> ... an abstract manifest will not cut it, the community needs something more specific. We need to have a direction for solving this problem, abstract discussion will not solve it because we need to have a fairly good idea about serialization by the end of the year. We need to define for ourselves how we work with the web app manifest which obviously everyone will ask about and we're presently far away from giving an answer about this
16:45:54 <bigbluehat> q+
16:46:16 <jeffp> ... We can lose our way in very detailed arguments but it's too early to get lost in details
16:47:12 <jeffp> ... I had the pleasure to work for several years with RDF and I have seen 4 different serializations that have been defined for the RDF. Let's not underestimate the complications of defining and abstract model. I'm against defining 2 or 3 syntaxes as standards for the manifest
16:47:13 <leonardr> @ivan - you are allowed to be sorry :)
16:47:45 <George> +1 to a single way
16:47:54 <garth> zakim, open the queue
16:47:54 <Zakim> ok, garth, the speaker queue is open
16:48:04 <jeffp> tzviya: I was wondering if we should leave the serialization discussion to github and instead go to the next agenda item
16:48:07 <laurentlemeur> @leonard, about options, pls see the XML goals #5: The number of optional features in XML is to be kept to the absolute minimum, ideally zero.
16:49:23 <jeffp> garth: Given ivan's comment it probably makes sense to set some sort of deadline to say we're as far as we are on the abstract manifest and we're going to move on to serialization and given our WG schedule it shouldn't be multiple weeks from now. If there is further discussion on section 3.2 it should be a homework assignment for the group to be able to say a week from today we start to move in to the concrete manifest/serialization? Reasonable
16:49:25 <jeffp> ?
16:49:31 <leonardr> q+
16:49:40 <jeffp> tzviya: Original deadline was tomorrow so you're being far more generous
16:49:48 <tzviya> ack le
16:49:59 <jeffp> leonardr: Can you clarify where you'd like feedback on section 3.2
16:50:11 <jeffp> tzviya: Comment on the pull request
16:50:15 <laurentlemeur> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/pull/43
16:50:32 <tzviya> topic: milestones
16:50:39 <jeffp> garth: Now there are 10 minutes left, the eclipse is starting on the west coast
16:50:44 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/milestones
16:50:44 <jeffp> ... moving on
16:51:03 <rkwright> MattG can you mute?
16:51:08 <jeffp> tzviya: On friday and over the weekend Ivan garth and I looked through the taskforce status and milestones
16:51:30 <rkwright> MattG
16:52:04 <leonardr> yes - coutn me in!
16:52:07 <jeffp> ... Abstract manifest due next week. We saw the metadata this morning, we'll work that into the agenda next week. I put out a call for the archiving task force next week. So far one person. Any more interest in the task force?
16:52:16 <jeffp> ... Security and privacy, any work we don't know about yet?
16:52:17 <laudrain> q+
16:52:26 <jeffp> leonardr: No work on security yet
16:52:27 <tzviya> ack la
16:52:55 <jeffp> tzviya: We'll continue with the feedback and once the doc is cleaned up we'll ask matt to add it to the main doc and add it to the agenda for next week
16:53:10 <bigbluehat> I volunteer for offline
16:53:13 <jeffp> ... Offline instance of web publications, do we have volunteers?
16:53:34 <jeffp> leonardr: clarification: Offline is not the same as packaged
16:53:59 <jeffp> tzviya: Tim, working on web publication reference, deadline sept 30th
16:54:08 <jeffp> timCole: Getting ben to help, it's good
16:54:15 <baldurbjarnason> I can help with offline.
16:54:32 <jeffp> tzviya: There's a lot of writing to do, these are very broad categories
16:54:48 <leonardr> Will do (on mateus)
16:54:50 <jeffp> ... Matteus offered to work on privacy/security section
16:54:57 <ivan> q+
16:55:07 <tzviya> ack iv
16:55:29 <jeffp> ... We've got to get this out before TPac:
16:55:58 <jeffp> ivan: The goal is to have a clear set of problems we have, a direction we're planning to go and an idea for the solution
16:56:44 <tzviya> metadata proposal https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ONzPOG-QwLwWeYpf_cPsvfc6cLGDRmHAEnql967dvEU/edit?usp=sharing
16:56:51 <laudrain> Metadata TF : Baldur, Boris and Luc
16:57:17 <garth> q?
16:57:30 <jeffp> leonardr: Keep in mind this is a public working draft, there will be issues but we need to drive toward completeness
16:57:49 <jeffp> ... get on a task force and help us nail down the manifest before the next meeting
16:57:55 <BenSchroeter> sun is a crescent now here on west coast
16:58:06 <jeffp> ... Let's go look at the sun but not really
16:58:09 <Rachel> s/leonardr/garth
16:58:19 <jun_gamo> jun_gamo has left #pwg
16:58:50 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:58:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/08/21-pwg-minutes.html ivan
16:58:57 <ivan> zakim, bye
16:58:57 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been ivan, Avneesh, baldurbjarnason, luc, bigbluehat, jeffp, jun_gamo, rachel, tzviya, Leonard, mattg, rdeltour, laurentlemeur,
16:58:57 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwg
16:59:00 <Zakim> ... Tim_Cole, clapierre, BenSchroeter, Bill_Kasdorf, George, yuri, Garth, duga, present, Hadrien
16:59:07 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
16:59:07 <RRSAgent> I see no action items