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

Yes. I am referring to DITA. I am not a DITA expert but I am asking the
pagination question now along with other items in the thread below of our
DITA experts.

Regarding table captions: caption is going away in HTML5. The caption
should be replaced with an aria-labelledby relationship to the
corresponding label.

Rich


Rich Schwerdtfeger



From: Jean Kaplansky <Jean.Kaplansky@aptaracorp.com>
To: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Cc: "public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org"
            <public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>, Tony Graham
            <tgraham@mentea.net>
Date: 11/11/2013 01:19 PM
Subject: Re: Overarching scope of the DPUB; Was re: Pagination ED, 28
            October  2013



DITA as in OASIS Open? There are a lot of vendors out there building DITA
products with an EPUB publishing option some of these solutions are simply
bolt on modules, on the inclusion of something like calibre as part of
their tool chain. Others are more sophisticated.

Are you saying that the official Oasis Open DITA TC is actually working on
specifying some specific mapping between DITA and EPUB 3, or is in fact,
architecting and developing an EPUB publishing solution, something that
would be bolted on to the DITA Open Toolkit, for example?

How people will get DITA to EPUB aside, the bigger question is… If there
are pagination requirements of the DITA publishing community not already
surfaced by the DPUB IG, should we be seeking these pagination requirements
out, or would this be considered out of the current scope of the interest
group at this time?

For the record, I’m just asking here. I don’t have anything specific in
mind. I just want to know what is firmly off the table for consideration.

Thanks,

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

cid:image001.jpg@01CD009C.E2F55700



From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Monday, November 11, 2013 at 1:28 PM
To: Jean Kaplansky <jean.kaplansky@aptaracorp.com>
Cc: "public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org" <public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>,
Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>
Subject: Re: Overarching scope of the DPUB; Was re: Pagination ED, 28
October 2013



DITA is working on code to emit ePub documents. IBM uses DITA internally.

Rich


Rich Schwerdtfeger

Inactive hide details for Jean Kaplansky ---11/11/2013 12:22:20 PM---Tony
has surfaced an idea that we might want to consider fJean Kaplansky
---11/11/2013 12:22:20 PM---Tony has surfaced an idea that we might want to
consider further (I place the blame for this solely

From: Jean Kaplansky <Jean.Kaplansky@aptaracorp.com>
To: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>, "public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org" <
public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>
Date: 11/11/2013 12:22 PM
Subject: Overarching scope of the DPUB; Was re: Pagination ED, 28 October
2013





Tony has surfaced an idea that we might want to consider further (I place
the blame for this solely at the feet of his S1000D reference).

Dave’s initial pagination document covers most books and core concerns that
may apply to a variety of vertical publishing concerns. The following
publishing communities have some very different pagination concerns,
however. Which begs the question: how many of the following communities
might be considered “in scope” of the Digital Publishing Interest Group
without necessitating a change in the group’s charter? Because we’re
missing a whole bunch of contributors if we are trying to cover the
following publishing communities:
      Academic/Scientific Journals (there is some representation already in
      the group. I don’t think we have a comprehensive list of people who
      truly represent the whole of academic and scientific journal
      publishing, though)
      Military (S1000D and other standards go here)
      Product Service information - which may include military, or not –
      think durable (e.g., oil well rig equipment, home appliances, etc.)
      and non-durable goods (e.g., baby products, camping gear, etc.)
      Automotive (which could be lumped into product service information
      under durable goods)
      Technical communications publishing, in general (which could be
      corporate and could make use of DITA)
      Regulatory submissions publishing (Pharma, Medical devices, Financial
      products, and anything else that requires government regulation –
      some of this could be lumped in with tech comm in general, other
      stuff is very specific to the government institutions to which the
      submitters are submitting)
For what it’s worth, if you think putting 6 different things in the footer
is complicated, you should see the algorithms that make up each of the four
unique pieces of information besides the revision and page number in that 6
item footer… This is before you start talking about the requirements for
what goes into the footers for change pages. Yes. I said change pages. I’ve
certainly never considered how one might accomplish the concept of creating
a change page package for an EPUB (and there are specific reasons that
S1000D publishers do this over rev’ing the entire publication).

DITA[1] alone aims to serve a number of these different publishing
communities through the specialization mechanism built into the standard.
There are current active specialization committees for Learning and
Training content (not to be confused with K-12 or higher ed textbook
content, but you could shoe horn a text book into this specialization if
you were really determined), Semiconductor Information Design, and general
Tech Comm.

All of these groups consider themselves to be “in the digital publishing”
domain. Luckily, the S1000D consortium has not seen fit to add EPUB 3 to
their list of required outputs (they seem to be happy with their IETM’s),
but that does not mean these other groups aren’t interested in getting
their content out there on devices through massively available reading
systems other the PDF, too. I know that most of the companies that produce
DITA publishing solutions, for example, are busily figuring out how to get
EPUB out of their DITA publishing workflows. Same goes for banks and other
institutions that produce financial analysis and market reports.

Looking back at the DPUB charter [2], I see references to books, journals,
magazines, on-line advertising, online education, textbooks, online test,
illustrations, etc. but nothing about tech docs or any of the other
specific publishing communities I mention above. The IDPF has always said
that EPUB was intended to be for more publication types than books, but the
current charter for the DPUB is very publishing-as-an-industry-centric.
Does this mean that the publishing communities I’ve listed above are
considered “out of scope” for the DPUB, or just that the DPUB hasn’t gotten
there yet? Better question… _Should_ the DPUB go there eventually,
considering each of parallel publishing groups above as a sub group? Or
should these parallel publishing groups have a DPUB unto themselves?

Clearly, there becomes a point where a groups scope has to be managed in
order for the group to get anything done. I’m not proposing to add any of
the groups I’ve mentioned above because I think this would create an
unmanageable scope of the DPUB as it currently sits. But those other
publishing interests aren’t going away, either, and they’ve made it pretty
clear that they want to publish their stuff on the web, too.

It would be very helpful for the DPUB charter group management team to
provide some clarity regarding my questions here. (Basically so I know
whether I have to type “S1000D" and/or “DITA" in this forum again anytime
soon.)

Thanks for considering.

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

cid:image001.jpg@01CD009C.E2F55700



[1] https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=dita
[2] http://www.w3.org/2013/02/digpubig.html


From: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>
Date: Sunday, November 10, 2013 at 1:05 PM
To: "public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org" <public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>
Subject: Pagination ED, 28 October 2013
Resent-From: <public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Sunday, November 10, 2013 at 1:05 PM

Status
------

Comments are directed to public-digipub-ig@w3.org, but the dpub
page at http://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/Main_Page states that
public comments are welcome on public-digipub-ig-comment@w3.org
and provides no indication that non-members can post to
public-digipub-ig@w3.org.  Which is correct?


5. Running headers and footers
------------------------------

There truly is more to running headers and footers than is dreamt
of in the open web platform.  For example (though few outside
aircraft/military applications would aspire to it), the S1000D
specification [1] describes six items and their prescribed
positions in the page footer:

- Document identifier

- Issue date

- Page number

- Applicability

- Security marking

- End of data module indication

The S1000D specification itself [2] manages to also put the
filename of what appears to be its original Word file in the
footer as well, though I can't find anywhere in the specification
for doing that.


8. Tables
---------

A common requirement for paginated documents is to repeat the
table caption or a variation of the table caption when a table
breaks across a page.  The variations on the table caption can
include repeating the table number and table caption plus text,
such as "(continued)", to indicate it is a continuation or just
the table number plus "(continued)" (or similar) since the
caption (which may be long) has already been seen.

A similar requirement is to place some text, such
as "(continues)", at the foot of a table part when the table
breaks across a page.


Lists
-----

The current document has sections on figures and tables but lacks
a section on lists.  There is nothing to indicate whether or not
this is a deliberate omission.

Regards,


Tony Graham                                   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://public.s1000d.org/Downloads/Pages/S1000DDownloads.aspx

[2] Under "/S1000D Issue 4.1/Specification/" in the S1000D Issue 4.1
    download




[attachment "graycol.gif" deleted by Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM]
[attachment "48651177.gif" deleted by Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM]