Re: [Glossary] Definition of a portable document (and other things...)

> On 08 Sep 2015, at 15:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
> While I agree with Olaf’s position, I don’t think the “good” terms would serve us well.
> 
> Instead, I’d like to build on Ivan’s point in the use of SHOULD and make two small changes to the Portable (Web) Document definition:
> 
> A **Portable (Web) Document** is a Web Document that should provide a graceful degradation when presented to the user even offline. A Portable Web Document should also be able to adapt to the user's needs.
> 

I can live with that.

Anybody else? Or should we declare victory? (There are some other terms to define:-)

Ivan

> 
> How’s that??
> 
> Leonard
> 
> From: Ivan Herman
> Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 12:22 AM
> To: Olaf Drümmer
> Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG, Leonard Rosenthol, Deborah Kaplan, Ralph Swick, Bill Kasdorf, Bill McCoy
> Subject: Re: [Glossary] Definition of a portable document (and other things...)
> 
> 
>> On 07 Sep 2015, at 21:39 , Olaf Drümmer <olaf@druemmer.com <mailto:olaf@druemmer.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Would this discussion become easier if based on a starting point like:
>> 
>> On 7 Sep 2015, at 16:48, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
>> 
>>> [[[
>>> A **Web Document** is a uniquely identifiable and curated set of interrelated Web resources. A Web Document should be constructed of resources whose formats enable (individually or in conjunction with other resources in the same Web Document) a graceful adaptation to the users' needs.
>>> 
>>> A **Portable (Web) Document** is a Web Document that has enough information to ensure a graceful degradation when presented to the user even offline. A Portable Web Document should also include enough information for a graceful adaptation to the user's needs.
>>> ]]]
>> 
>> we distinguished between
>> **Web Document** and **good Web Document**
>> and also between
>> **Portable (Web) Document**  and **good Portable (Web) Document**
>> 
>> Requirements like "graceful adaptation to the users' needs" are all fine, but some web documents might just not adapt gracefully and still would have to be called a web documents…
> 
> I am a bit afraid of overcomplicating things by introducing too many terms.  This is why it says "should" and not a "must": this is a pragmatic choice...
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Just my 2 cents…
>> 
>> 
>> Olaf
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
> 
> 
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704