RE: [dpub] agenda 20161003

I don’t think many people misunderstand your position on this, Peter. My feeling, as I’ve previously stated, is that the problem MathML was intended to solve is a hard one. We shouldn’t throw it out just because it has flaws and hasn’t 100% met its goals. Instead, an alternative should be developed. With due respect, what I’ve seen offered so far as an alternative is just a collection of hacks and not a comprehensive solution. As such, I expect it will not achieve its (mostly unstated) goals either and the problem will remain unsolved. Of course, I don’t want to stop anyone from trying to solve the problem. But, until such a solution has been developed and proven to be superior, we shouldn’t tear down our existing solution, MathML. What you say here clearly attempts to kill the competition (MathML) before your solution is even a contender. I understand you want to divert energy away from MathML and toward your solution but, to do so, you need to talk up your solution, not simply tear down MathML.


From: Peter Krautzberger []
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 8:18 AM
To: Bill Kasdorf <>
Cc: Alan Stearns <>; Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <>;
Subject: Re: [dpub] agenda 20161003

Ok, this might be viewed as a rant. But since I've been apparently too subtle about this in the past:

> we do that_ because the value of the MathML in the workflow is unquestionable

I think this is the key error in this argument. In my experience, the value of MathML for the web has been extremely exaggerated, in particular for visual but more importantly for other use cases, especially accessibility.

Personally, I think MathML is a fundamentally flawed standard when it comes to the web. It might be fine for xml document workflows but for the web it's ultimately a bad technology from a lost age called the 90s.

It need not be used and should not be used today.


On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Bill Kasdorf <<>> wrote:
I still think we're missing the point of the initial request. And maybe the ensuing discussion reveals that MQ (despite its apparent appealing simplicity as the _interim_ solution we are looking for) is not going to work and we need to come up with another tack that _will work right now_, not a year or two years or a decade from now.

Here's what we need.

--Publisher has MathML.
To recap what I've said a gazillion times, STM publishers generate literally millions of equations as MathML. I wouldn't be surprised if the organization I work for _itself_ produces millions of equations as MathML _every year_. Yes, we have to do some tweaks sometimes to work around things that go wrong, but _we do that_ because the value of the MathML in the workflow is unquestionable. We could not do what we do without it.

--Publisher creates image of equation from MathML.
I am a huge fan of MathJax, and I am thrilled at the developments over the past year, wrt both server-side functionality and accessibility enhancement. Kudos to Peter and co. SVG or HTML+CSS or .jpg, the publisher has controlled "this is what the equation must look like." Visually.

--Publisher puts BOTH the MathML and the image in an EPUB.
Publishers are NOT doing this now because they can't trust that the image will be used when the MathML support is insufficient; they just want to provide the image to be safe. They don't put the MathML in the EPUB because then some reading systems try to use it and mess it up or don't even realize they should use the image.

--Publisher has a way to say "use the image for visual rendering and make the MathML available to AT."
This is what we need RIGHT NOW while the industry struggles to come up with a real solution, which may or may not ultimately involve rendering MathML reliably (though of course remember those millions of equations rendered from MathML that STM publishers find quite acceptable).

--Reading systems actually do that.

We are not looking for an assertion that a reading system will render the MathML perfectly. That may be the reason the appealing MQ assertion won't fly.

What we need is an interim solution that will make it safe for publishers to deliver the MathML along with the image that they want displayed visually. For now.

Bill Kasdorf

VP and Principal Consultant | Apex CoVantage


734-904-6252<tel:734-904-6252>  m:   734-904-6252<tel:734-904-6252>



From: Alan Stearns [<>]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 10:25 AM
To: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken; Peter Krautzberger;<>

Subject: Re: [dpub] agenda 20161003


I thought exactly the same thing when I read it, but Peter had beat me to it. There’s already a long thread discussing this on www-style.



From: "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <<>>
Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 5:24 AM
To: Peter Krautzberger <<>>, "<>" <<>>
Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG <<>>
Subject: RE: [dpub] agenda 20161003
Resent-From: <<>>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 5:25 AM

Thanks, Peter. I think it would be helpful to pass this on to the CSS WG.

Tzviya Siegman
Information Standards Lead

From: Peter Krautzberger []
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2016 10:37 AM
Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG
Subject: Re: [dpub] agenda 20161003

Regrets from me. It's a public holiday where I live.

But I wrote up my thoughts on the media query at

As I said in the breakout meeting, this is my personal opinion and what I would tell my clients.


On Sep 30, 2016 3:50 PM, "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <<>> wrote:


Below is the draft agenda for next week's IG concall, to be held at the usual time and day [0].

Please let us know if you are able to scribe. Please join the call via WebEx [1] and join IRC [13] for live chat & minutes (IRC channel #dpub).

Webex:<> (note: you will need a password. Refer to earlier message for pwd or log in to IRC to obtain)


* Approve minutes [2] [3] [4]

* New Meeting time: beginning next week,  10 Oct, Monday. 16:00 UTC/12:00 EDT/18:00 CET

* Post-TPAC Action items: See list below

* Remember to fill out post-TPAC Survey [5]

Post TPAC Action items:

•          WCAG: (@Avneesh/Charles)

o   provide techniques etc from EPUB to AWK and JO by Dec,

o   see (already reviewed).

o   schedule joint call (chairs can coordinate scheduling)

o   See for info about writing new success criteria and for SC template.

•         CSS

o   Provide Dean Jackson with information about why publishers need tables

o   Clarify with Peter K what status of Math MQ is and next steps

o   @dave – look into InDesign hanging punctuation

o   @david_wood: table samples to Dean Jackson

o   @liam – XSL-FO => CSS-FO

•         (P)WP:

o @Tzviya assign Heather’s issues to individuals

o   @Leonard dedupe PWP-UCR

o   @Heather reorg PWP-UCR

o   @brady action 65: split PWP into review chunks

o   Many have been assigned github issues. Please check to see if you’ve been assigned an issue. Pay attention to the issues.

o   Future: look into Object Model for WP

•         POE:

o   Tzviya/BillK to reach out to Journals Publishers re: POE, ODRL mapping








To join this telecon, use the following logistics:

Webex [10]

Join chat and minutes on Zakim

We will also use an IRC channel to minute the discussions:


Available ports (choose one): 6667, 6665, 21 IRC channel: #dpub See how to connect [11] using an IRC client [12] or our web interface [13] User Instructions for Zakim [14] To mute your line press 61#. Unmute is 60#.

To place yourself on the speaker queue ('q+' in irc) press 41# (Handup).

Unqueue ('q-' in irc) is 40#.


Digital Publishing Interest Group home page<> Digital Publishing Interest Group Wiki<>

* Digital Publishing Interest Group Charter<>

* IG Task forces<>






Tzviya Siegman
Information Standards Lead

Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2016 17:20:58 UTC