23:54:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #epub
23:54:01 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/11/11-epub-irc
23:54:04 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
23:54:04 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), dauwhe_
23:54:15 <dauwhe_> Meeting: EPUB 3 Working Group Telecon
23:54:28 <dauwhe_> Chair: dauwhe
23:54:50 <dauwhe_> dauwhe_ has changed the topic to: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-epub-wg/2021Nov/0017.html
23:54:54 <shiestyle> shiestyle has joined #epub
23:55:09 <dauwhe> dauwhe has joined #epub
23:57:58 <toshiakikoike> toshiakikoike has joined #epub
23:58:46 <toshiakikoike> present+
23:59:18 <dauwhe> present+
23:59:28 <MattChan> MattChan has joined #epub
23:59:47 <MasakazuKitahara> MasakazuKitahara has joined #epub
23:59:52 <MasakazuKitahara> present+
23:59:56 <shiestyle> present+
00:00:19 <MattChan> present+
00:00:50 <mgarrish> mgarrish has joined #epub
00:01:51 <mgarrish> present+
00:02:10 <duga> duga has joined #epub
00:02:14 <victoria> victoria has joined #epub
00:02:15 <duga> present+
00:02:31 <MattChan> scribe+
00:03:39 <victoria> present+
00:04:25 <dauwhe> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/1873
00:04:29 <MattChan> dauwhe: 4 items on the agenda today, revisiting old issues, but hopefully we can make some progress today
00:04:31 <MattChan> TOPIC: Obfuscation
00:04:55 <MattChan> dauwhe: from PING horizontal review, there were questions about obfuscation
00:05:33 <MattChan> ... fair amount of discussion. Obfuscation is widely used, so that means we can't get rid of it without invalidating existing epubs regardless of the merits
00:06:04 <MattChan> ... right now obfuscation can be applied to any number of resources in the epub. I'm in favor of restricting this to fonts - i.e. the original use case
00:06:30 <MattChan> ... not aware of real uses of obfuscation for anything other than fonts, so risk of limiting uses of obfuscation is low
00:06:46 <duga> q+
00:06:47 <MattChan> ... we could also recommend alternatives to obfuscation, such as use of WOFF and subsetting
00:06:49 <dauwhe> ack du
00:07:14 <MattChan> duga: WOFF also can't be copied for use on your system
00:07:20 <MattChan> ... so I support this
00:07:26 <shiestyle> q+
00:07:33 <dauwhe> ack shi
00:08:09 <mgarrish> q+
00:08:31 <dauwhe> ack mg
00:08:33 <MattChan> shiestyle: in JP in many cases we don't have encryption in RS. So this won't have a big impact on JP market. It won't be a problem.
00:08:53 <MattChan> mgarrish: re. limiting to fonts, how would we do this? List a set of font formats?
00:09:02 <MattChan> ... we'll need to update epubcheck as well
00:09:31 <MattChan> ... i don't think we'd be limiting it to the font mime type right?
00:09:40 <MattChan> dauwhe: i was thinking we would limit to font core media type
00:09:57 <duga> q+
00:10:03 <MattChan> mgarrish: that covers the widely used ones, but not sure if there's anything else out there
00:10:09 <dauwhe> ack du
00:10:12 <MattChan> ... don't want to have to keep updating epubcheck
00:10:48 <MattChan> duga: I wish we could just restrict the list of fonts to the core list
00:11:00 <MattChan> dauwhe: right, what about postscript type1 fonts
00:11:05 <dauwhe> q?
00:11:56 <MattChan> ... would it be reasonable to say you can only obfuscate fonts in the core media types, that this will be testable in epubcheck, and then let the people who are working around this in obscure ways speak up?
00:12:36 <MattChan> duga: can we just non-normatively note what the intention is?
00:12:53 <MattChan> ... i.e. don't obfuscate things that aren't fonts, and try to use WOFF instead
00:13:51 <dauwhe> PROPOSAL: allow obsfucation only for fonts. Formally restrict to the font core media types. Add note suggesting using WOFF instead of obsfucation, and to say the intent is to cover all types of fonts.
00:14:22 <shiestyle> +1
00:14:22 <dauwhe> +1
00:14:25 <MattChan> +1
00:14:25 <victoria> +1
00:14:26 <toshiakikoike> +1
00:14:27 <MasakazuKitahara> +1
00:14:31 <mgarrish> q+
00:14:31 <duga> +1
00:14:37 <dauwhe> ack mg
00:14:51 <MattChan> mgarrish: i wonder if there's some way of tying this to how fonts are declared
00:15:16 <MattChan> ... e.g. font family, link, etc.
00:15:28 <MattChan> ... rather than trying to list the types of fonts specifically
00:16:00 <MattChan> dauwhe: okay, that might be cleaner way of getting to the result we want
00:16:14 <duga> q+
00:16:48 <MattChan> duga: it feels like that would be hard to do, e.g. chemML which has its own way of referencing fonts
00:17:13 <dauwhe> RESOLVED: allow obsfucation only for fonts. Formally restrict to the font core media types. Add note suggesting using WOFF instead of obsfucation, and to say the intent is to cover all types of fonts.
00:17:27 <dauwhe> ack du
00:19:52 <MattChan> ... but the reality is that the industry is still going to use obfuscation. Drafting language around this is going to be tricky. Easiest way would be to just have a non-normative note and see if that is satisfactory to PING.
00:20:50 <dauwhe> q?
00:21:43 <MattChan> dauwhe: the proposed solution would satisfy the vast majority of cases though, most people would be happy with it...
00:22:03 <MattChan> ... so do we go back to ndoty now to propose a non-normative, note based solution?
00:22:29 <MattChan> duga: the problem is that the media type for fonts isn't well defined, there could be epubs out there using weird fonts
00:24:15 <MattChan> mgarrish: i think epubcheck already has some sort of internal list of font types, but we'd need them to confirm
00:25:00 <dauwhe> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/1874
00:25:01 <MattChan> duga: changes like this push vendors towards moving away from using epubcheck as part of their ingestion pipeline
00:25:29 <MattChan> dauwhe: next PING issue, there was some discussion earlier about ripping some of the DRM hooks out of the spec
00:25:47 <MattChan> ... general consensus was no, there are valid use cases, such as obfuscation
00:26:10 <MattChan> ... can't get right of encryption.xml, signing things could be useful
00:26:29 <MattChan> ... leaning towards recommending that we not change the DRM things that are already in the spec
00:26:30 <mgarrish> q+
00:26:32 <MattChan> ... does that seem reasonable?
00:26:53 <dauwhe> ack mg
00:27:48 <MattChan> mgarrish: I found some old language about "future versions of spec might require DRM", so I'll probably just cut that
00:27:58 <MattChan> dauwhe: yes
00:28:26 <MattChan> ... where did you see that?
00:28:36 <MattChan> mgarrish: that was in core spec
00:29:07 <dauwhe> PROPOSAL: Close 1874; remove line from spec about "This version of the specification does not require a specific format for DRM information, but a future version might. "
00:29:13 <MattChan> s/require DRM/require specific format for DRM
00:29:33 <MattChan> mgarrish: might want to just cut that whole paragraph, the rest of it is pretty non-specific
00:30:01 <dauwhe> PROPOSAL: lose 1874; remove para from spec that contains "This version of the specification does not require a specific format for DRM information, but a future version might. "
00:30:15 <dauwhe> s/lose/close/
00:30:18 <dauwhe> +1
00:30:20 <MattChan> +1
00:30:22 <shiestyle> +1
00:30:23 <MasakazuKitahara> +1
00:30:26 <toshiakikoike> +1
00:30:29 <mgarrish> +1
00:30:33 <duga> +1
00:30:34 <dauwhe> q?
00:30:38 <victoria> +1
00:31:03 <dauwhe> RESOLVED: Close 1874; remove para from spec that contains "This version of the specification does not require a specific format for DRM information, but a future version might. "
00:31:28 <dauwhe> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/1898
00:31:48 <MattChan> TOPIC: Testing Assignments
00:31:56 <MattChan> duga: do we want to wait until we have Romain?
00:33:10 <MattChan> ... looking at comments on PR, it seems like most people are okay with the idea, but the specific details need to be hashed out
00:33:38 <MattChan> dauwhe: i'm fine with not addressing this tonight, we can probably let the conversation continue over in github
00:34:04 <dauwhe> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/1889
00:34:06 <MattChan> TOPIC: Approve PRs
00:34:43 <MattChan> dauwhe: this is writing language for when should happen when same item is referenced multiple times in the spine
00:34:51 <dauwhe> q?
00:34:57 <MattChan> ... there are a bunch of approvals from reviews over in github
00:35:06 <MattChan> mgarrish: okay with me
00:35:15 <dauwhe> PROPOSAL: merge 1889
00:35:17 <dauwhe> +1
00:35:17 <MattChan> s/from reviews/reviewers
00:35:18 <mgarrish> +1
00:35:20 <duga> +1
00:35:22 <shiestyle> +1
00:35:23 <victoria> +1
00:35:23 <MattChan> +1
00:35:24 <toshiakikoike> +1
00:35:29 <MasakazuKitahara> +1
00:35:42 <dauwhe> RESOLVED: merge 1889
00:35:57 <MattChan> dauwhe: that's it for the agenda items
00:36:13 <MattChan> ... we've been making progress in some other areas. We're getting formal approval on APA horizontal review
00:36:52 <MattChan> mgarrish: procedurally its been a bit complicated
00:37:12 <MattChan> dauwhe: in the cases of PING and TAG they have review repositories
00:37:44 <MattChan> ... TAG triaged their review for us today, assigned people to do the reviewing
00:38:09 <MattChan> ... PING issues are ongoing, we're close on i18n
00:38:12 <dauwhe> q?
00:38:14 <MattChan> TOPIC: AOB?
00:38:41 <MattChan> dauwhe: thanks everyone for being here, we'll see you over on github or on next week's call
00:38:41 <dauwhe> zakim, end meeting
00:38:41 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been toshiakikoike, dauwhe, MasakazuKitahara, shiestyle, MattChan, mgarrish, duga, victoria
00:38:43 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
00:38:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/11-epub-minutes.html Zakim
00:38:47 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, dauwhe; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
00:38:51 <Zakim> Zakim has left #epub
00:39:14 <dauwhe> RRSAgent: bye
00:39:14 <RRSAgent> I see no action items