W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > September 2015

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

From: Bill McCoy <bmccoy@idpf.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 14:50:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CADMjS0bYgn68Lv129z+BWS2CRCMFzTM1NK9he=6tSBWHXPKQTw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: Deborah Kaplan <dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com>, Liam Quin <liam@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
Hi Leonard, yes to me the key point is your restriction that the
presentational content & interactivity (the "HTML/CSS/JS") is "itself
represented [as] a resource in the package".

With that constraint the result, in my book, should qualify as a "Portable
Web Document" (PWD), as would also a bare naked CSV file on the Web. Your
example would be a somewhat app-ish PWD but that's perfectly OK to me.
Whereas if the presentational content & interactivity were consed up by
server processes and not represented as resources that can travel along
with the rest of the CSV content, then I would not consider that to be a
PWD. Basically to me if everything in its original native form is available
as Web resources (which BTW is what I'm taking you to mean by "in the
package") it's a PWD. If either the data or its presentation-related
content/interactivity are mediated by server programs and thus their
original forms are hidden away in databases or CMS's of some kind, then
it's not a PWD (to me), because all you can grab and archive is a
particular manifestation, not the Real McCoy ;-).

--Bill





--Bill


On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
wrote:

> I am not sure where I stand on your calendar, but let me give you another
> example.
>
> If I had a collection of data (say the results of a scientific experiment
> or even my organization’s sales number) stored in the “package” as a
> defined resource (say foo.csv) and the presentation of that information was
> done dynamically by some set of HTML/CSS/JS that itself represented a
> resource in the package.
>
> Is that a portable web document?  (to you)
>
> Leonard
>
> From: Bill McCoy
> Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 4:41 PM
> To: Deborah Kaplan
> Cc: Liam Quin, W3C Digital Publishing IG
> Subject: Re: [Glossary] Definition of a portable document (and other
> things...)
> Resent-From: <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 4:41 PM
>
> If an online calendar is simply a UX over a database then I don't consider
> it a "document" (whether or not the calendar entries have been curated).
> But if the calendar system can produce a PDF representation of the
> calendar, that would be a portable document (but not a "portable *web*
> document").
>
>


-- 

Bill McCoy
Executive Director
International Digital Publishing Forum (IDPF)
email: bmccoy@idpf.org
mobile: +1 206 353 0233
Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2015 21:51:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:12 UTC