Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC spec for EPUB a11y

2017-08-09 0:11 GMT+09:00 Bill McCoy <bmccoy@w3.org>:

>
> I think the EPUB 3 CG can make the planning assumption that any ISO IS or
> TS crated from a W3C specification (including work product of EPUB 3 CG as
> well as RECs of WGs) could be arranged to be freely available in its ISO
> form and/or strictly compatible with W3C specification that would remain
> free. It is a non-starter that we would do otherwise.
>

Agreed.

Regards,
Makoto


>
>
> --Bill
>
>
>
> *From:* Levantovsky, Vladimir [mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:40 AM
>
> *To:* Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>; MURATA Makoto <
> eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>; public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> Thank you Leonard,
>
> I knew that JTC1 has some special status within ISO organization but I
> didn’t realize that freely available standards can only be published by
> JTC1 subcommittees.
>
> My experience (probably, not typical) was that it was fairly easy to make
> a case for a standard to be made freely available - both parts 22 and 28 of
> ISO/IEC 14496 (that I worked on as a project editor) are available for
> free. What is really surprising though is that many folks don’t seem to
> realize that this is the case; about a year ago someone at ISO Secretariat
> asked me to provide them with additional marketing information because it
> turned out that ISO/IEC 14496-22 is one of their best-selling standards.
> Apparently, many folks just buy it with no regard for notification that
> says this standard can be downloaded from ITTF website.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Vladimir
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com <lrosenth@adobe.com>]
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 08, 2017 9:31 AM
> *To:* Levantovsky, Vladimir; MURATA Makoto; public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> So I looked into this, and here is what I learned:
>
>
>
> The only group/organization that can have free standards is the JTC1
> standards. The provision of standards for free is confined to certain
> projects developed by JTC1 that conform to strict conditions established by
> the ISO Council. JTC1, as you know is also an ISO/IEC committee that has
> special or different rules than those that we follow for ISO standards.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Levantovsky, Vladimir [mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com
> <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com>]
> *Sent:* Monday, August 7, 2017 2:44 PM
> *To:* Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>; MURATA Makoto <
> eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>; public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> There are many standards that are available from ISO for free, you can see
> them all here:
>
> http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstandards.iso.org%2Fittf%2FPubliclyAvailableStandards%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1ddfcfe27bbf44edf2ca08d4ddc445e5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636377282449776183&sdata=UPNYoyAOjcFb60Pw57OYP3OehyykMgJoEyA7NbsHX7U%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> And, in my experience, ISO will make any standard available for free if
> the project editor makes a good case for it (and the subcommittee that
> developed a standard will back him/her up submitting a request to make a
> standard available for free. FYI, I did it for every edition of the
> OpenFont standard (ISO/IEC 14496-22), which you can see listed there in the
> list of standards.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Vlad
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com <lrosenth@adobe.com>]
>
> *Sent:* Monday, August 07, 2017 12:23 PM
> *To:* MURATA Makoto; public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> It’s a bit more complex than that – involving copyrights and ownership of
> the standard – but Makoto is correct that some standards can also be free.
>
>
>
> Leonard
>
>
>
> *From: *<eb2mmrt@gmail.com> on behalf of MURATA Makoto <
> eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
> *Date: *Monday, August 7, 2017 at 11:53 AM
> *To: *"public-epub3@w3.org" <public-epub3@w3.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
> *Resent-From: *<public-epub3@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Monday, August 7, 2017 at 11:52 AM
>
>
>
> Leonard and George,
>
>
>
> 2017-08-07 23:50 GMT+09:00 Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>:
>
> > I would like to suggest that the ISO specifications are made freely
> available
>
> >
>
> George, that is never going to happen given the current ISO
> infrastructure.  As you probably know, there is no cost to be a (voting!)
> subject matter expert on an ISO committee (although some countries impose
> fees to join the national standards bodies).  Because of this, ISO makes it
> $$ by charging for standards.   (this is reversed from W3C, where you need
> to pay to get a vote at the table, but then the standards are free).
>
>
>
> Actually, if some spec is already freely available from a different
> organization,
>
> we can request ISO to make an equivalent ISO spec freely available.
>
>
>
> Here is an example.
>
>
>
> 1) Free from W3C
>
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/xml-model/
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fxml-model%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caeaa59a8adf2423d0d2408d4ddac6c7a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636377180009625410&sdata=ER9hKtbR8LotRg0aHrFDCfTTCyW8WNFNPPYyS5tGAaM%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> 2) Not free from ISO
>
>
>
> https://www.iso.org/standard/54793.html
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.iso.org%2Fstandard%2F54793.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caeaa59a8adf2423d0d2408d4ddac6c7a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636377180009625410&sdata=YJ%2Fqu%2FwabLMtF%2F8GZ7L9R4qr9CW8wEeH%2FXXRkJe2Ijc%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> 3) Free from ISO
>
>
>
> http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/
> c054793_ISO_IEC_19757-11_2011.zip
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstandards.iso.org%2Fittf%2FPubliclyAvailableStandards%2Fc054793_ISO_IEC_19757-11_2011.zip&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caeaa59a8adf2423d0d2408d4ddac6c7a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636377180009625410&sdata=mB0sIVNYDIIkIoabcpnxziiEzIe964T6VqU9gZIaj3k%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>  There three documents are technically equivalent.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >in HTML
>
> >
>
> Going back to the first item, because they need to sell something, they
> need a solution that is self-contained.
>
>
>
> However, since your real concern isn’t the format but the desire to have
> something that is accessible, you should know that we (TC171) have been
> discussing with them the needs for accessible standards and have been
> working with them to make all the PDFs PDF/UA compliant (since PDF/UA is an
> ISO standard – it would be good if they “drank their own champagne”).  In
> addition, their new publishing system, for all its faults, **could**
> produce an EPUB file as a secondary option to the PDF. That has also been
> discussed with them as well, and they are willing to consider it - but they
> need to find an equivalent “protection mechanism” to what they use on the
> PDFs before that can happen.
>
>
>
> I am hopeful that as our work on PWP continues that we will be able to
> work with them to see the future of ISO publications be complaint PWPs in
> one or more profiles.
>
>
>
> Leonard
>
>
>
> *From: *"kerscher@montana.com" <kerscher@montana.com>
> *Date: *Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:02 AM
> *To: *'MURATA Makoto' <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, 'Avneesh Singh' <
> avneesh.sg@gmail.com>
> *Cc: *"public-epub3@w3.org" <public-epub3@w3.org>
> *Subject: *RE: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
> *Resent-From: *<public-epub3@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:01 AM
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> Regardless of the direction we take, I would like to suggest that the ISO
> specifications are made freely available in HTML. I believe that many ISO
> documents are only available at a cost in PDF. To promote accessibility we
> should avoid this restriction on our submission.
>
>
>
> Best
>
> George
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* eb2mmrt@gmail.com [mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *MURATA
> Makoto
> *Sent:* Monday, August 7, 2017 1:56 AM
> *To:* Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> Avneesh
>
>
>
> 2017-08-07 13:44 GMT+09:00 Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Makoto,
>
>
>
> From all the great information provided by you, I understood the following.
>
> - The ISo drafting rules are quite different than W3C drafting rules. So,
> most probably we will have to re-draft EPUB accessibility specs for ISO if
> the current rules of ISO persist.
>
>
>
> This is unlikely to change.  Japan does not intend to propose a change to
>
> Directives, Part 2.
>
>
>
> But the current editing procedure requires that (1) you use MS Word, (2)
> ITTF
>
> creates XML from your Word doc, (3) ITTF then creates a Word doc and a
>
> PDF doc from the XML, (4) ITTF then sends the Word and PDF files to you,
>
> and (5) you will be asked to correct  many mistakes introduced during
>
> this process in a very short time.  Japan intends to complain here.
>
>
>
> - We should wait for October ISO meeting before we make decision on
> redrafting, because there is a possibility that ISO decide to change some
> rules in October.
>
>
>
> At least, we hope that we will not be requested to follow the above
>
> procedure.
>
>
>
> The next question is what effect it have on us as EPUB 3 CG group.
>
> - If we are looking for EPUB accessibility spec 1.0 to go for ISO then
> this will have an effect.
>
> - But if we intend to work on ISO standardization of EPUB accessibility
> spec 1.1 then it may not be having much effect, because the new spec will
> cbe released in next year.
>
> If the members invoke ISO to change rules in October, will ISO be able to
> settle its rules in 6 to 8 months?
>
>
>
> Today I spoke with Prof. Ishikawa.  He is a member of the UN
> Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities [1].  He
> is also the chair of the Japanese government committee on the
> Policies for Disabilities.
>
> [1] https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/
> conference-of-states-parties-to-the-convention-on-the-
> rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2/9thsession.html
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.un.org%2Fdevelopment%2Fdesa%2Fdisabilities%2Fconference-of-states-parties-to-the-convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2%2F9thsession.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C79cc63761b4a431645d108d4dd9ce3bf%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636377113299294880&sdata=IJLtOwctDzT4J3YZUFNcoXFAzLTLMzkQP5W6vxNcd10%3D&reserved=0>
>
> I explained to him that there is a plan to create an ISO/IEC
> version of EPUB Accessibility.  He immediately asked whether
> it will be an International Standard or Technical
> Specification.  I said that the plan is to create a Technical
> Specification.  He said that a Technical Specification will
> not be considered as a de jure standard by the Japanese
> government, and strongly requested an IS rather than a TS.
>
>
>
> I thus would like the CG to create ISs for both EPUB 3.0.1 and
>
> EPUB Accessibility.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
> With regards
>
> Avneesh
>
> *From:* MURATA Makoto
>
> *Sent:* Monday, August 7, 2017 03:29
>
> *To:* public-epub3@w3.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> Leonard,
>
>
>
> You are very right.  As far as I know, ITTF does not pay much attention
> to what committees say.   I am hoping that they will pay more attention
> to what member bodies (who pay) say.  It would be nice if member
> bodies in the upcoming JTC1 plenary read the JTC 1 Project
> Editors’ Forum Report (prepared by the SC22 chair, Rex Jaeschke)
> in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Makoto
>
>
>
> 2017-08-07 4:49 GMT+09:00 Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>:
>
> Good luck with getting them to change their process!!   Two of my TCs have
> been trying to get them to change for years now, including have meetings
> with the people in charge to explain the technical problems in their
> current system.  Unfortunately, they were “conned” (my word choice) into
> purchasing a publishing system on which they spent a **lot** of $$ - and
> they are therefore unwilling to make another change (esp. since it would
> require them to almost completely toss this ‘new’ system).
>
>
>
> Matt, you are however quite correct that something coming out of respec
> won’t comply with ISO guidelines…
>
>
>
> Leonard
>
>
>
> *From: *<eb2mmrt@gmail.com> on behalf of MURATA Makoto <
> eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
> *Date: *Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 11:29 AM
> *To: *"public-epub3@w3.org" <public-epub3@w3.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
> *Resent-From: *<public-epub3@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 11:28 AM
>
>
>
> Matt,
>
>
> Unfortunately, the current editing process in ISO are "hopelessly broken",
> as pointed out by ISO/IEC JTC 1 Project Editors’ Forum Report
>
> (SC34 N2405).  We might want to wait for the next JTC1 plenary
>
> in 2017 October, because member bodies (e.g., Japan) will argue
>
> against ISO/IEC Information Technology Task Force (ITTF) and
>
> try to change the current process.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2017-08-06 21:42 GMT+09:00 Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>:
>
> > In my understanding, outputs from the CG have no status in W3C and are
> thus free from W3C rules
>
>
>
> That's what we should clear up. The documents have been converted to use
> respec, which requires certain things (status section, abstract, etc.) and
> generates others automatically (table of contents, references at the end of
> the document, etc.). I don't believe the output is fully compatible with
> ISO structure rules as I reviewed them.
>
>
>
> I'd hate to have to maintain a document manually, although worst-case we
> might be able to post-process the respec output to excise unwanted parts
> and reshuffle.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* eb2mmrt@gmail.com [mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com <eb2mmrt@gmail.com>] *On
> Behalf Of *MURATA Makoto
> *Sent:* August 5, 2017 10:42 PM
> *To:* public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC
> spec for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> Matt,
>
>
>
> 2017-08-06 11:01 GMT+09:00 Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>:
>
> Is the idea here that a copy of the 1.0 specification will be taken and
> submitted to ISO with these changes, which look like they don't change
> anything normatively?
>
>
>
> This is possible.
>
>
>
> Or are we supposed to prepare a 1.1 like this and publish it in W3C?
>
>
>
> This is also possible.
>
>
>
> If so, I wonder how some of the ISO requirements won't conflict with
> respec/W3C practices.
>
>
>
> In my understanding, outputs from the CG have no status in W3C and
>
> are thus free from W3C rules
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* eb2mmrt@gmail.com [mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com <eb2mmrt@gmail.com>] *On
> Behalf Of *MURATA Makoto
> *Sent:* August 5, 2017 8:17 PM
> *To:* public-epub3@w3.org
> *Subject:* [a11y] Editorial changes required for creating an ISO/IEC spec
> for EPUB a11y
>
>
>
> Folks,
>
>
>
> Since we cannot use the fast-track procedure or PAS procedure, we are
>
> required to follow the drafting rules of ISO/IEC.  (Note: EPUB 3.0
>
> did not follow them, since it was fast-tracked.)
>
>
>
> ISO/IEC Directives Part 2: Principles to structure and draft documents
>
> intended to become International Standards, Technical Specifications
>
> or Publicly Available Specifications.
>
>
>
> http://www.iso.org/sites/directives/2016/part2/index.
> xhtml#_idTextAnchor055
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iso.org%2Fsites%2Fdirectives%2F2016%2Fpart2%2Findex.xhtml%23_idTextAnchor055&data=02%7C01%7C%7C0d28638058994996038c08d4dcdfe584%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636376301595853117&sdata=70anc9k6sdA4hRVtvUr%2FrmCR7IkvcV%2BNx0y%2B5MYGpj4%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> I think that there are two significant changes.
>
>
>
> First, we have to provide Foreword, Introduction, and Scope as
>
> required by Directives Part 2.  This requires some work, although
>
> we can use some text from "1. Overview" in EPUB A11Y 1.0.
>
>
>
> Second, we have to use SHALL, MAY, and other modal verbs as required
>
> by Directives Part 2.  Most notably, all MUSTs have to be replaced by
>
> SHALLs.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake
>
> Makoto
>



-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto