Re: [pwg] Remixing content - in scope for WP

Resources vs. “spine” is probably more about whether the thing is referenced in the manifest or not, then what type of thing it is.  For example, if something isn’t referenced in the manifest, can it be referenced from outside.  This also goes to Murato-san’s comments in one of the issues where he talks about resource URIs.

Sub-item was the best way I could think to talk about a single paragraph (for example) in an HTML file.

And yes, this also varies for P vs. not – agreed.

Leonard

From: "Brady com>" <duga@google.com>
Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 12:49 PM
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <tsiegman@wiley.com>, "public-publ-wg@w3.org" <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [pwg] Remixing content - in scope for WP

It would seem odd to restrict linking; I don't see any reason to (the concerns raised in the original content don't seem to apply), nor have we done that in epub. So my answer would be no, remixing does not include linking. As for resources and "spine items", I don't think I understand your definitions. At least in epub, spine items are resources, not sure about strict definitions on the web, but it seems like html documents are resources. In which case, if remixing applies to resources, it also applies to "spine items". No idea what a "sub-item" is, so I have no opinion. But I agree the term "remixing content" is vague and could use a good definition. And there may well be different answers for packaged vs unpackaged (or not!).

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote:
And as discussed in the issue – there is also the question of what “remixing” means in this context.

Are we simply looking at allowing “linking” (vs. inclusion/embedding)?  Do it apply only to resources or also to “spine items”?  What about sub-items?

Leonard

From: "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>>
Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 12:12 PM
To: "public-publ-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-publ-wg@w3.org>" <public-publ-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-publ-wg@w3.org>>
Subject: [pwg] Remixing content - in scope for WP
Resent-From: <public-publ-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-publ-wg@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 12:12 PM

This was raised on GitHub [1], but I think it’s an issue about what’s in scope for WP.

Should WP, PWP, EPUB 4 allow remixing content? When we discussed this in the DPUB IG, we pushed out to a later date because of security concerns, cross-origins and many other issues.

[1] https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/8<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwpub%2Fissues%2F8&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ccac1099c52d7421ced0008d4c94603a7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636354749928874024&sdata=a2p8Lu6jnqwWDWCAE%2FJ1EHYMkNotzBA94t8cMrw12xM%3D&reserved=0>

Tzviya Siegman
Information Standards Lead
Wiley
201-748-6884<tel:(201)%20748-6884>
tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>