RE: Overarching scope of the DPUB; Was re: Pagination ED, 28 October 2013

And it's not just a matter of whether S1000D would _itself_ ever be in scope for CSS, DPIG, or the OWP, and vice-versa, it's that the type of content managed in S1000D will definitely need to be accommodated by the OWP. Whether or not HTML5 etc. could ever _replace_ S1000D (as it is now starting to replace DocBook et al. in certain cases, e.g., O'Reilly, Pearson), I definitely think the DPIG needs to be aware of the complexities involved with publishing that kind of content. (Ditto for DITA.)
--Bill Kasdorf

From: Jean Kaplansky [mailto:Jean.Kaplansky@aptaracorp.com]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 4:15 PM
To: Tony Graham
Cc: Ben Ko; public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org
Subject: Re: Overarching scope of the DPUB; Was re: Pagination ED, 28 October 2013

I don't think it was a bad to bring this up. Similarities to opening Pandora's box aside, I actually think that it was a good point to bring up to get some clarification around DPUB scope expectations.

The pagination requirements of the military and therefore, anything that contributes documentation to the military are truly a science unto themselves. It's not just typography to that crowd. Pagination is typography and protocol and security clearance and international agreements and oh, so much more.

Jean Kaplansky
Solutions Architect
Aptara, Inc.
Email: jean.kaplansky@aptaracorp.com<mailto:jean.kaplansky@aptaracorp.com>
Skype: JeanKaplansky
Mobile: 518 487 9670

[cid:image001.jpg@01CD009C.E2F55700]

From: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net<mailto:tgraham@mentea.net>>
Date: Monday, November 11, 2013 at 4:06 PM
To: Jean Kaplansky <jean.kaplansky@aptaracorp.com<mailto:jean.kaplansky@aptaracorp.com>>
Cc: Ben Ko <bko@koandkim.com<mailto:bko@koandkim.com>>, "public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org<mailto:public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>" <public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org<mailto:public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Overarching scope of the DPUB; Was re: Pagination ED, 28 October 2013

On Mon, November 11, 2013 6:32 pm, Jean Kaplansky wrote:
...
My bad... I was still in shock at seeing S1000D in a business email since
2011 when I was working at PTC. :)

My bad... I mentioned S1000D partly because it's a well-known example of a
publication type that won't be satisfied with strings in 16 pre-defined
slots around the page [1] and partly because, from the outside looking in,
it's hard to tell whether something like S1000D would ever be in scope for
CSS, DPIG, or the OWP, and vice-versa [2].

Regards,


Tony Graham                                   tgraham@mentea.net<mailto:tgraham@mentea.net>
Consultant                                 http://www.mentea.net
Mentea       13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --
    XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming
       Chair, Print and Page Layout Community Group @ W3C

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-page/#margin-boxes
[2]
http://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/201311/msg00066.html