13:47:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pmwg
13:47:54 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/04/05-pmwg-irc
13:47:54 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:47:55 <Zakim> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group
13:48:22 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2024-04-05: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2024Apr/0000.html
13:48:23 <ivan> Chair: wendy, tzviya
13:48:23 <ivan> Date: 2024-04-05
13:48:23 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2024Apr/0000.html
13:48:24 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Telco
13:48:24 <ivan> Regrets+ rickj, dhall
13:54:53 <George> George has joined #pmwg
13:55:54 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pmwg
13:58:58 <shiestyle> shiestyle has joined #pmwg
13:59:16 <toshiakikoike> toshiakikoike has joined #pmwg
14:01:11 <toshiakikoike> present+
14:01:13 <wendyreid> present+
14:01:28 <shiestyle> present+
14:01:51 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pmwg
14:01:56 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #pmwg
14:01:59 <gpellegrino> present+
14:02:33 <ivan> present+
14:02:40 <tzviya> present+
14:02:49 <George> present+
14:02:58 <ivan> present+ dale_rogers
14:03:02 <Dale0> Dale0 has joined #pmwg
14:03:13 <ivan> present+ masakazu
14:03:25 <LaurentLM> LaurentLM has joined #pmwg
14:03:42 <ivan> present+ hadrien
14:03:50 <gpellegrino> scribe+
14:03:50 <ivan> present+ LaurentLM
14:04:03 <ivan> present+ jaclyn_retallick
14:04:09 <ivan> present+ avneesh
14:04:23 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: Welcome to the PMWG, we have a guest today
14:04:28 <AvneeshSingh> AvneeshSingh has joined #pmwg
14:04:44 <AvneeshSingh> present+
14:05:10 <gpellegrino> Jaclyn: I work at Rakuten Kobo with Wendy, I'm an intern at the QA team
14:05:29 <wendyreid> https://w3c.github.io/epub-specs/epub33/fxl-a11y/
14:05:32 <MasakaziKitahara> MasakaziKitahara has joined #pmwg
14:05:42 <gpellegrino> s/Jaclyn/jaclyn_retallick/
14:05:46 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pmwg
14:05:53 <Hadrien> present+
14:05:53 <MasakaziKitahara> present+
14:05:56 <ivan> Topic: Publishing the FXL A11y WG Draft Note
14:06:13 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: there's been a join task force between PMWG and Publishing CG
14:06:52 <gpellegrino> ... with the focus to produce guidelines to make FXL ebooks more accessible
14:07:20 <gpellegrino> ... the question today is to make the note published as a draft note, to get a broader review
14:07:58 <gpellegrino> ... this document is a practice and recomandations document
14:08:24 <George> q+
14:08:25 <gpellegrino> ... it will have a techniques document where we'll list how to achieve the goals proposed
14:08:30 <wendyreid> ack George
14:09:04 <gpellegrino> George: before we approve this (6 month from now), do we aspect to have authoring tools or publishers or reading systems that will support it?
14:09:55 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: because it's a note it doesn't require the process of the rec, so is not required to have implementations
14:10:30 <gpellegrino> ... at the same time we based our suggestions from real life ebooks and tools
14:10:42 <gpellegrino> George: do we want to test it?
14:10:53 <AvneeshSingh> It would be helpful to know what draft note mean. Does it mean that structure of note is freezed, or is it a more mature version of editor's draft, and structure can be revisited?
14:11:01 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: it's not mandatory, but may help
14:11:42 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: it's a more mature version of an editors' draft
14:11:45 <ivan> q+
14:11:51 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:11:57 <gpellegrino> ... having it published as TR we'll make it more visible
14:12:44 <gpellegrino> ivan: the difference between a draft note and a note is more on the naming, then on the content or the stability of the document
14:12:59 <Dale0> q+
14:13:05 <wendyreid> ack Dale
14:13:07 <gpellegrino> q+
14:14:08 <gpellegrino> Dale0: I asked big retailers specs about FXL, they sent me links both to new and old version of EPUB
14:14:56 <wendyreid> ack gpellegrino
14:14:56 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: Yes, I know that documents, reading systems normally try to support all versions of EPUBs
14:15:02 <wendyreid> scribe+
14:15:35 <wendyreid> gpellegrino: Two questions, before publishing as a draft note, do we want a short period of review for this group?
14:15:58 <ivan> q+
14:16:06 <wendyreid> ... one of the last notes about accessibility exemptions, we requested an OK from APA, since we speak about Accessibility, do we need to ask them to review?
14:16:06 <wendyreid> 
14:16:09 <wendyreid> ack vi
14:16:12 <wendyreid> ack iv
14:16:35 <gpellegrino> ivan: to the second question, we have no requirements to ask for an horizontal review
14:17:08 <gpellegrino> ... I'm comfortable in publishing it now as a draft note
14:17:36 <AvneeshSingh> q+
14:17:36 <gpellegrino> ... as an aside I asked ??? and ??? to ask them a review
14:17:39 <tzviya> q+
14:17:44 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
14:17:51 <ivan> s/???/Kevin/
14:18:05 <ivan> s/??? to/Shawn to/
14:18:41 <gpellegrino> AvneeshSingh: APA review may not be important for a process point of view, but maybe before the official release may be good to ask them a review
14:18:55 <gpellegrino> ... maybe we can ask also to the AG WG
14:19:02 <gpellegrino> ... since WCAG are involved
14:19:10 <wendyreid> ack tzviya
14:19:31 <gpellegrino> ... for the time to review I suggest 2-3 weeks for internal review
14:20:22 <gpellegrino> tzviya: I think that publish the draft note doesn't impede us from update it later
14:21:30 <ivan> q+
14:21:36 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: is there any concern in publish it?
14:21:37 <AvneeshSingh> q+
14:22:01 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:22:10 <gpellegrino> ... I think it's ok to publish it in draft note status
14:23:05 <gpellegrino> ivan: I understand the reactions, but I would prefer to publish the note to make it known by the world
14:23:26 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
14:23:29 <gpellegrino> ... the document is under discussion from fairly long time, so I think it is the right time now
14:24:04 <gpellegrino> AvneeshSingh: two things, I think we should ask APA before publish it as "official" note
14:24:13 <shiestyle> q+
14:24:32 <gpellegrino> ... I think an internal review should be useful, having the notice about it 10 days ago would be great
14:24:33 <ivan> q+
14:24:47 <gpellegrino> ... it's ok that for the task force the document is fine
14:25:31 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: we ave a publishing moratorium next week, but we may move it to the end of the month
14:25:36 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:26:07 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:26:15 <gpellegrino> shiestyle: I agree to publish it as a draft note, so it's more easy to have feedback from DAISY Japan
14:26:55 <gpellegrino> ivan: I propose to do something in the middle, I propose to vote via email for publishing the note
14:27:37 <gpellegrino> ... everybody in two weeks reviews the note and in two weeks we take the decision about publishing it
14:27:39 <gpellegrino> q+
14:27:59 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: I agree I can send it at the end of the meeting
14:28:06 <gpellegrino> ... asking for review
14:28:14 <wendyreid> ack gpellegrino
14:28:38 <wendyreid> gpellegrino: In the meantime, we still have the monday meetings of the TF, we can meet there and discuss there, we don't need the WG call to discuss
14:29:04 <wendyreid> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2602
14:29:06 <ivan> Topic: Webtoons discussion cont.
14:29:23 <ivan> q+
14:29:32 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:29:39 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: we would like to find some kind of consensus
14:30:56 <gpellegrino> ivan: on the GitHub comments Hadrien proposed a possible solution, but it requires to add a new normative feature in the spec, and we are not allowed by the charter
14:31:36 <gpellegrino> ... I propose to put this charter question aside and we try to find the best solution based on consensus
14:31:59 <gpellegrino> ... at the end if the best solution requires to change the charter we can work on it
14:32:38 <shiestyle> q+
14:32:56 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:33:29 <gpellegrino> shiestyle: the Japanese community doesn't want a new feature for publishing webtoons
14:34:11 <gpellegrino> ... but if most people in the group want it, I'm not against it
14:34:30 <tzviya> q+
14:34:49 <wendyreid> ack tzviya
14:35:22 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: I think one problem here is that we don't have enough knowledge about webtoons outside Japan
14:36:49 <Hadrien> q+
14:36:49 <gpellegrino> tzviya: we had a long discussion, we said that the user may select the preferred way to read ebooks (scroll o paginated)
14:36:49 <LaurentLM> q+
14:36:54 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:37:09 <gpellegrino> ... the webtoons that are being printed are paginated
14:37:52 <gpellegrino> Hadrien: for that content what you don't want to do is to have a page with a little content in the middle
14:38:06 <gpellegrino> ... the problem is how to move forward and backward
14:38:21 <gpellegrino> ... in a smartphone does the content have to fit the width?
14:38:36 <shiestyle> q+
14:38:40 <wendyreid> q+
14:39:07 <wendyreid> ack LaurentLM
14:39:08 <gpellegrino> ... using reflow or FXL doesn't matter, they both don't work in this way
14:39:35 <gpellegrino> LaurentLM: tzviya said that is not about reading systems capabilities, it's about semantics
14:40:02 <gpellegrino> ... in pre-paginated we speak about pages, and a viewport
14:40:18 <gpellegrino> ... in webtoons we speak about tiles, each with different dimensions
14:40:28 <gpellegrino> ... those are two different things
14:40:54 <gpellegrino> ... if we want to use EPUB for webtoons (it's fine), but we need another approach
14:41:22 <gpellegrino> ... if we use FXL a reading system will display tiles in "pages", with edges
14:41:33 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:41:40 <gpellegrino> ... so I think we cannot use the pre-paginated world for webtoons
14:41:54 <Hadrien> q+
14:42:26 <gpellegrino> shiestyle: it depends: rendition-flow: scroll-continuos is for us a sign to say that the EPUB is a webtoons
14:42:41 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
14:42:44 <gpellegrino> ... because we don't have another value to express it
14:43:28 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: a lot of these are coming down to implementations and reading systems
14:43:38 <ivan> q+
14:44:19 <gpellegrino> ... however a lot of these will come down to user preferences and how they prefer to read content
14:44:47 <gpellegrino> ... I can read with scroll both for reflowable content and FXL
14:45:18 <tzviya> +1 to wendyreid
14:45:35 <tzviya> q+
14:45:39 <gpellegrino> ... we just want to give the content creator the ability to signal that scroll is the preferred way to consume that content
14:45:46 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:46:13 <gpellegrino> Hadrien: I'm trying to list requirements at high level:
14:46:23 <shiestyle> q+
14:46:31 <gpellegrino> ... you want to have content that fits the full with of the viewport
14:46:55 <gpellegrino> ... you want to list tiles on attached to the other (without borders)
14:47:07 <gpellegrino> ... you want to access the whole content by scrolling it
14:47:33 <gpellegrino> ... for this I think that the pre-paginated UX is not the good one
14:48:10 <gpellegrino> ... an additional thing is how to deal with series and collections
14:48:28 <gpellegrino> ... reflowable is all on the power of the user
14:49:02 <gpellegrino> ... FXL is based on control by the content creator and as the assumption that you see the whole "page" in the viewport when you load it
14:49:51 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:49:54 <gpellegrino> ... I think the UX would be much better if there is something specific, then using the FXL
14:50:57 <gpellegrino> ivan: the current disagreement is that some publishers are using a undefined combination of proprierties to signal that a content is a webtoon
14:51:27 <LaurentLM> +1 to Ivan, that is right
14:51:37 <wendyreid> ack tzviya
14:51:38 <Hadrien> +1 to Ivan, that's a good summary
14:51:40 <gpellegrino> ... what Hadrien says is to create a new value to express clearly what publishers want
14:52:37 <LaurentLM> q+
14:52:45 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:53:01 <gpellegrino> tzviya: I think we are discussing all the same thing in these meetings; we have publishers already doing it, we have to help them.
14:53:36 <gpellegrino> q+
14:53:48 <ivan> q+
14:54:03 <ivan> qq+
14:54:04 <gpellegrino> shiestyle: I think we don't need a new feature, we are already using it, changing the old content may be challenging
14:54:09 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:54:09 <Zakim> ivan, you wanted to react to shiestyle
14:54:51 <wendyreid> q+
14:54:54 <wendyreid> ack LaurentLM
14:54:56 <ivan> ack ivan
14:55:12 <gpellegrino> ivan: the way I understand it, is not to add requirements for new features in the reading system, but to better express the content nature
14:56:00 <gpellegrino> LaurentLM: I understand that in Japan the prototype was developed and coming to the standard body, and here the discussion is happening
14:56:13 <wendyreid> ack gpellegrino
14:56:18 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
14:56:32 <gpellegrino> ... is good to have the prototype, now let's find a good way to express it
14:57:02 <gpellegrino> wendyreid: maybe we can do this iteratively
14:57:20 <Hadrien> q+
14:57:35 <gpellegrino> ... we have also to think about expanding EPUB
14:58:01 <gpellegrino> ... but this is only part of the solution
14:58:26 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:58:38 <gpellegrino> ... right now it may be a little bit rough, but with better metadata, and OPF organization and etc. we can improve the UX
15:00:01 <gpellegrino> Hadrien: in reflowable is the user that decides how to read the content, we have seen few EPUBs using rendition-flow in the wild, and fewer reading systems supporting it
15:00:33 <gpellegrino> ... I think that extending something that is poorly implemented in reflow is not a good idea to expand it to FXL
15:00:59 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:01:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/05-pmwg-minutes.html ivan
15:05:36 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
15:05:36 <RRSAgent> I see no action items