Re: Chunk allocation + Registration Authority

A few extra points of information to add to what Pierre-Anthony wrote.

On 2022-01-22 18:32, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux wrote:
> Good morning/evening,
>
> In preparation for our call on Monday and per my homework [1], below
> are data points and thoughts on how to handle the Registration
> Authority (RA) mentioned in the PNG REC [2].
>
> Couple of data points/assumptions:
>
> - the RA defined at [2] is defunct
Yes. It existed at the time, but was based on a very old (written on 
paper) liaison agreement and it seems that neither SC24 nor W3C can lay 
hands on it now so it is no longer in effect. So not just the RA but 
also the entire pattern of publishing jointly with SC24 is defunct.
> - creating and maintaining RAs (as defined by ISO) require significant
> bureaucratic overhead and lead time
I agree that we should not do this.
> - the next edition of PNG should continue to be published in
> collaboration with ISO
Yes, but using the Publicly Available Specification (PAS) process which 
is how we have been publishing other specifications (such as WCAG) to ISO.
> - new chunks will be added in the future
> - implementers should be encouraged to inform others of the private
> chunks they define
> - there will be two PNG RECs: a Core REC [2] and an Extensions REC [3]
It isn't clear that the Extensions should be, or can be, Rec track. That 
implies a level of testing and interoperability inconsistent with a 
registry of "people might use" chunks. Instead the extensions should be 
either a Note or a Registry.
>
> I suggest the following approach:
>
> - remove all mentions of the RA from the Core REC
Yes, clearly.
> - create a WG Note that lists all private chunks included in neither
> the Core nor the Extensions RECs.
Yes, I think that is better, but means we document stuff that is broken 
and we should say why a particular chunk is not going in the Extensions 
spec.
>   New private chunks are added to the
> list by simple revision of the WG Note. Each chunk has a link to the
> defining specification/entity.
Where that exists. For some, there is no definition, the chunks just 
show up in the wild and maybe people guess what they are for.
> - encourage the community to submit their private chunks to the WG for
> additional to the WG Note
> - informatively reference the WG Note from the Core and Extensions
> RECs, e.g. "additional private chunks are listed at <link>"
> - all not-yet allocated public chunks are "reserved by W3C", i.e. they
> must be defined in the Core or Extension REC
Yes, good idea.
> - add new chunks to the Core and Extensions REC on a case-by-case
> basis and through revisions of the RECs. These chunks will typically
> be public chunks, but exceptionally can be private chunks.
Nicely put.
>
> Looking forward to the discussion.
>
> Best,
>
> -- Pierre
>
> [1] https://github.com/w3c/PNG-spec/issues/49
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/PNG/
> [3] https://w3c.github.io/PNG-spec/extensions
>
-- 
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media

Received on Monday, 24 January 2022 11:16:57 UTC