- From: Peter Krautzberger <peter@krautzource.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 11:23:49 +0200
- To: AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>
- Cc: Fabrizio Venerandi <fabrizio.venerandi@quintadicopertina.com>, W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABOtQmH=BW1sZfvLHFJZRcthmpet6W_v+Uf4t16yLqdMaMURvA@mail.gmail.com>
+1 to Fabrizio's use case of non-linear publications. I think it's very important since it's pervasive on the web. Luc wrote > The possibly of multiple reading order is an interesting use case. > I don¹t see that having one by default hinder that possibility. I agree with both, though I understand Fabrizio's point in how the term "reading order" can be misleading (or perhaps it's "primary resources" that's misleading; I'm not sure). Still, I would imagine even a non-linear publication will have some entry point; for the Wikipedia, https://wikipedia.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page etc. To me it seems like a reading order with 1 item should work and is feasible to provide even for non-linear publications. For comparison, the web app manifest separates start_url and scope and some kind of split might be worth pondering. A separate topic is the user interface. I think least a few people in the group hope there will eventually be some kind of native UI for web publications in browsers. There has already been some discussion on how a potential native UI will interact with an author-provided UI (even if it's "just" a polyfill); I have trouble tracking down the various threads or issues where this came up though. Best, Peter. 2017-08-07 10:30 GMT+02:00 AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>: > Copying the W3C Publishing Working Group. > > I encourage you to read the mail thread « definition of Web Publication » > where this has been discussed. > There is also a github issue open by Dave Cramer [1] where you could > contribute. > > Luc > > [1] https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/14 > > > > Le 07/08/2017 09:47, « Fabrizio Venerandi » > <fabrizio.venerandi@quintadicopertina.com> a écrit : > > >Hi, > > > >I think “no default” could be the better option. What is the “default > >order” in Wikipedia, for example? > >The problems with having an "order by default” are imho two: > > > >a) with a default order "by default” (sorry) the digital publication is > >still designed as a “book”. So we will have more “digitalised books” > >instead “digital publications”. > > > >b) the bigger one: I fear the reader’s support for non linear digital > >publications will still be a mess. I’m not only talking about the > >problems for have “closed islands” of information connected only by link, > >but also of the inappropriate technologies about rendering. For example: > >Ibooks, when a ebook is opened, is pre-paging all the ebook in > >background. This is cool for a “digitalised book”, but is inappropiate > >for a digital publications. Why paginate “pages” I’ll never reach? And > >what if, in "first page", I touch a link that brings me in the "last > >page" of the DP? The "default order” forces Ibooks to paginate the ebook > >following it, "page after page" and not the order the reader will use > >moving inside the publication. The concept of “first page” or “last page” > >in a digital publication is quite silly. > > > >Fabrizio > > > > > >> Il giorno 07 ago 2017, alle ore 09:22, AUDRAIN LUC > >><LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr> ha scritto: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> When you say « a digital publication that allow *multiple* reading order > >> by default », which one is he default? > >> Or do you mean there is no default? > >> > >> The possibly of multiple reading order is an interesting use case. > >> I don¹t see that having one by default hinder that possibility. > >> > >> Luc > >> > >> > >> > >> Le 07/08/2017 08:56, « Fabrizio Venerandi » > >> <fabrizio.venerandi@quintadicopertina.com> a écrit : > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I¹d like to share my perplexity about the recent definition about the > >>> reading order in digital publication: > >>> > >>> ³The default reading order is the static progression through the > >>>primary > >>> resources defined in the manifest by the creator of a Web Publication. > >>>A > >>> user might follow alternative pathways through the content, but in the > >>> absence of such interaction the default reading order defines the > >>> expected progression from one primary resource to the next.² > >>> > >>> Our publisher house is creating ebooks in ePub from 2010, and one of > >>>big > >>> limit in creating native digital ebook is the ³book² notion of ³default > >>> reading order². There is not a ³default reading order² in a website, > >>>but > >>> I need to allow one in a digital publication. This prevents me to build > >>> an ebook with several different "reading order² without the risk the > >>> reader can fall from one to another one. I can not set a rule for a > >>> chapter for ³don't go in another chapter when the user turn the last > >>> page². So, I can use the atomic complexity of a website for a digital > >>> publication, but I have to pray the user will use my hyperlink and does > >>> not turn the pages, because I have to ³flat down² my atomic resource > >>>to a > >>> linear book. Also, the concept of ³default reading order² caused a lot > >>>a > >>> misunderstanding for how handle the ³non default² chapters in ebook. > >>>The > >>> Œlinear-no¹ support in ePub and EPUB3 is a mess: someone handles it as > >>>a > >>> pop-up, someone like a normal chapter (but does not remember the page I > >>> was reading if I close the ebook), someone like a separate atom (but > >>>if I > >>> turn the last page I will ³fall² in another chapter), someone does not > >>> support linear-no at all. Et ceterae. > >>> > >>> I hope the working group could still think about a digial pubblication > >>> that allow *multiple* reading order by default, and not a single one. > >>> > >>> Thank you. > >>> > >>> > >>> Fabrizio Venerandi > >> > > > >
Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 09:24:34 UTC