W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-publ-wg@w3.org > August 2017

Re: Why a default reading order?

From: AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:30:25 +0200
To: Fabrizio Venerandi <fabrizio.venerandi@quintadicopertina.com>
CC: W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D5ADF033.C1A47%laudrain@hachette-livre.fr>
Copying the W3C Publishing Working Group.

I encourage you to read the mail thread « definition of Web Publication »
where this has been discussed.
There is also a github issue open by Dave Cramer [1] where you could
contribute.

Luc

[1] https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/14




Le 07/08/2017 09:47, « Fabrizio Venerandi »
<fabrizio.venerandi@quintadicopertina.com> a écrit :

>Hi,
>
>I think “no default” could be the better option. What is the “default
>order” in Wikipedia, for example?
>The problems with having an "order by default” are imho two:
>
>a) with a default order "by default” (sorry) the digital publication is
>still designed as a “book”. So we will have more “digitalised books”
>instead “digital publications”.
>
>b) the bigger one: I fear the reader’s support for non linear digital
>publications will still be a mess. I’m not only talking about the
>problems for have “closed islands” of information connected only by link,
>but also of the inappropriate technologies about rendering. For example:
>Ibooks, when a ebook is opened, is pre-paging all the ebook in
>background. This is cool for a “digitalised book”, but is inappropiate
>for a digital publications. Why paginate “pages” I’ll never reach? And
>what if, in "first page", I touch a link that brings me in the "last
>page" of the DP? The "default order” forces Ibooks to paginate the ebook
>following it, "page after page" and not the order the reader will use
>moving inside the publication. The concept of “first page” or “last page”
>in a digital publication is quite silly.
>
>Fabrizio
>
>
>> Il giorno 07 ago 2017, alle ore 09:22, AUDRAIN LUC
>><LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr> ha scritto:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> When you say « a digital publication that allow *multiple* reading order
>> by default », which one is he default?
>> Or do you mean there is no default?
>> 
>> The possibly of multiple reading order is an interesting use case.
>> I don¹t see that having one by default hinder that possibility.
>> 
>> Luc
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Le 07/08/2017 08:56, « Fabrizio Venerandi »
>> <fabrizio.venerandi@quintadicopertina.com> a écrit :
>> 
>>> Hi, 
>>> 
>>> I¹d like to share my perplexity about the recent definition about the
>>> reading order in digital publication:
>>> 
>>> ³The default reading order is the static progression through the
>>>primary
>>> resources defined in the manifest by the creator of a Web Publication.
>>>A
>>> user might follow alternative pathways through the content, but in the
>>> absence of such interaction the default reading order defines the
>>> expected progression from one primary resource to the next.²
>>> 
>>> Our publisher house is creating ebooks in ePub from 2010, and one of
>>>big
>>> limit in creating native digital ebook is the ³book² notion of ³default
>>> reading order². There is not a ³default reading order² in a website,
>>>but
>>> I need to allow one in a digital publication. This prevents me to build
>>> an ebook with several different "reading order² without the risk the
>>> reader can fall from one to another one. I can not set a rule for a
>>> chapter for ³don't go in another chapter when the user turn the last
>>> page². So, I can use the atomic complexity of a website for a digital
>>> publication, but I have to pray the user will use my hyperlink and does
>>> not turn the pages, because I have to ³flat down² my atomic resource
>>>to a
>>> linear book. Also, the concept of ³default reading order² caused a lot
>>>a
>>> misunderstanding for how handle the ³non default² chapters in ebook.
>>>The
>>> Œlinear-no¹ support in ePub and EPUB3 is a mess: someone handles it as
>>>a
>>> pop-up, someone like a normal chapter (but does not remember the page I
>>> was reading if I close the ebook), someone like a separate atom (but
>>>if I
>>> turn the last page I will ³fall² in another chapter), someone does not
>>> support linear-no at all. Et ceterae.
>>> 
>>> I hope the working group could still think about a digial pubblication
>>> that allow *multiple* reading order by default, and not a single one.
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Fabrizio Venerandi
>> 
>

Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 08:30:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:49:06 UTC