W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > September 2016

RE: "Show me the metadata!" :), was Re: Rough sketch for WP

From: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:07:00 +0000
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: David Wood <david.wood@ephox.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, "Tzviya Siegman" <tsiegman@wiley.com>, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, "Baldur Bjarnason" <baldur@rebus.foundation>, Dave Cramer <dave.cramer@hbgusa.com>, Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>
Message-ID: <CY1PR0601MB1422469C3B3B3604AE815C19DFCC0@CY1PR0601MB1422.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
+1

Bill Kasdorf

VP and Principal Consultant | Apex CoVantage

p:

734-904-6252  m:   734-904-6252

ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786<https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en>


From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 5:57 AM
To: Bill Kasdorf
Cc: David Wood; Robin Berjon; Tzviya Siegman; Marcos Caceres; Baldur Bjarnason; Dave Cramer; Michael Smith; W3C Digital Publishing IG; Peter Krautzberger
Subject: Re: "Show me the metadata!" :), was Re: Rough sketch for WP


On 27 Sep 2016, at 11:08, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>> wrote:

I agree, presuming that one possible choice is to put the metadata in the publication (though by far the more common and preferred practice would be to maintain it externally to the publication). This is consistent with current actual practice regarding metadata in most (but not all) sectors of publishing.


We have to be careful what this means, specifically for metadata not embedded in the HTML content or part of the manifest.

- If we consider a Web Publication only (ie, simply on the Web), this means that the metadata is a separate file somewhere on the Web, referring to from, say, the manifest. What has to be conveyed somehow is whether offline is applicable for it, ie, whether that file is one of those that is 'registered' by the service worker based layer that handles the publication.
- If we consider a Packaged Web Publication, then the issue is whether the metadata should be part of the package or not.

I think the choice should be (1) taken by the author/publisher and (2) it should be the same in both cases. By "the same" I mean if the Packaged Web Publication is 'unpacked', then the corresponding manifest should somehow list the metadata file as being candidate for offline handling, and vice versa: if a WP is packed, all files listed for offline handling must be present in the package.

Ivan

----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2016 10:07:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 25 April 2017 10:44:45 UTC