- From: Garth Conboy <garth@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:19:41 -0800
- To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
- Cc: Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADExNBPGkbsZMCU=4xRa3pFqytZT=uJC3DHCg4CF=_y+nZ8COg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: > Well, lack of support for ANY JS in a WP would make them quite limited in > capabilities (see various UCR use cases for examples) – so I hope that > wasn’t really what you meant… > Indeed -- not was I was saying. Just want to avoid any *requirements* that the rendering JS be included with the publication -- should be able to have a very simple publication that's rendered completely independently of content. > I think that whether we will even have a definition of an RS – or simply > have standard OWP UA’s – is going to be quite the conversation. However, > regardless of that, I think it is very important that we enable > publications to provide their own layout and/or pagination engine (such as > Florian’s Vivliostyle) instead of relying on whatever might exist in the > RS/UA. > Hmmm... might argue some of that (content versus Reading System)... but, yes, for discussion! :-) Best, Garth > > Leonard > > > > *From: *Garth Conboy <garth@google.com> > *Date: *Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM > *To: *Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com> > *Cc: *Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, > W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org> > *Subject: *Re: JS - inside or out? > > > > My 2-cents is we can't/shouldn't get to any place that requires any part > of the Reading System (or really any JS) be included/embedded-in a PWP > publication. > > > > Best, > > Garth > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Hadrien Gardeur < > hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I don't think that this is a choice that we should be mandating either, > these are simply two different use cases. > > > > For publications that are truly native to the Web, they can either decide > to provide a fallback for progressive enhancements that might be missing in > browsers currently, or completely ignore them. > > These types of publications are IMO much more likely to embed JS, but it > remains entirely their choice. > > We just need to figure out a way to: > > - identify that a JS provides such progressive enhancements in order > to turn it off eventually > - make sure that each progressive enhancement can be tested > individually, this way we can have a much more fine grained approach for > such a "Web Publication Polyfill" > > I've listed a few of the progressive enhancements that could be supported > at: https://github.com/HadrienGardeur/webpub- > manifest/wiki/Web-Publication-JS-Features > > > > For publications that are not native to the Web (for example when an EPUB > is turned into a Web Publication), I think we're much more likely to see JS > used for a separate Web App that behaves like a reading system/app. > > This is what Dave has built with ACME JS, and I've also built a similar > prototype at: https://github.com/HadrienGardeur/webpub-viewer > > Someone from my team at Feedbooks (Bastien Quelen) even built a simple > prototype in Go that takes an EPUB and: > > - generates a Web Publication Manifest on the fly using the info > extracted from the OPF > - streams individual resources from the publication using HTTP > > This project is available at: https://github.com/banux/webpub-streamer > > > > Hadrien > > >
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2016 05:20:15 UTC