- From: Garth Conboy <garth@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:43:09 -0400
- To: "Johnson, Rick" <Rick.Johnson@ingramcontent.com>
- Cc: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>, "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <tsiegman@wiley.com>, W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADExNBOOMNF571aeZ208rqkVBAGOJgprzdCT6nHMk5iDMCx=Hw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Rick, I tend to think using "standard OWP technologies" is likely the only reasonable way of presenting WP content. However... It's a little bit unclear to me what "standard OWP technologies" means -- if I write my own CSS engine is that "non-standard OWP technologies" if I don't use a system Browser or WebView is that "non-standard?". So, I kinda think the "may" is correct -- in that it's requirement that whatever we do is presentable using the "normal" stuff... but, I'm not sure I'd make it a requirement. Best, Garth On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Johnson, Rick < Rick.Johnson@ingramcontent.com> wrote: > Leonard, > > > > Restating my issue with the original: > > > > In response to the word “MAY” in the definition of WP, I’m trying to > understand the use cases for a W3C specification for any WP that does not > present using OWP. > > > > Why would this not be “is” (to affirm that what we are doing is around > OWP, while leaving open a door for non OWP) or “must” (closing the door for > anything not OWP)? > > > > -Rick > > > > *From: *Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> > *Date: *Monday, July 24, 2017 at 5:14 PM > *To: *Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>, 'Garth Conboy' < > garth@google.com> > *Cc: *"'Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken'" <tsiegman@wiley.com>, 'W3C Publishing > Working Group' <public-publ-wg@w3.org> > *Subject: *Re: definition of Web Publication > *Resent-From: *<public-publ-wg@w3.org> > *Resent-Date: *Monday, July 24, 2017 at 5:13 PM > > > > Appreciate the attempt to open it, but I still am quite happy with the > original. I still don’t see a real need to change it… > > > > Leonard > > > > *From: *Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com> > *Date: *Monday, July 24, 2017 at 6:18 PM > *To: *Garth Conboy <garth@google.com> > *Cc: *"'Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken'" <tsiegman@wiley.com>, 'W3C Publishing > Working Group' <public-publ-wg@w3.org> > *Subject: *RE: definition of Web Publication > *Resent-From: *<public-publ-wg@w3.org> > *Resent-Date: *Monday, July 24, 2017 at 6:18 PM > > > > To Garth, no, not omitted on purpose so much as not having a lot of time > to think about it before having to run out. :) > > > > To Leonard, sure, if you're concerned about interpretation it can be made > more open. But, again, the definition as was written tells you nothing > about a web publication or what makes it unique. I can see how that was > agreed on for a specification that wasn't defining web publications, but if > the idea is that we move to something more tangible, that's what I'd offer > based on how discussions have progressed so far. It no doubt will need > further tweaking as we progress, of course, and perhaps manifest will go > away. But until then a manifest appears to be the course we're charting. > > > > Updating from my original post, perhaps: > > > > A Web Publication is a uniquely identifiable representation of a bounded > work using Open Web Platform technologies. It is defined by a collection of > constituent resources linked together through a manifest. The content of a > Web Publication can take a wide variety of forms, from formal artistic and > intellectual works to ad hoc documents and memos. > > > > Matt > > > > *From:* Garth Conboy [mailto:garth@google.com] > *Sent:* July 24, 2017 1:42 PM > *To:* Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com> > *Cc:* Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com>; W3C Publishing > Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org> > *Subject:* Re: definition of Web Publication > > > > I'm gonna go with "+1". I tend to think "uniquely identifiable grouping" > is key. Matt, did you omit that on purpose? > > > > Best, > > Garth > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com> > wrote: > > It's a somewhat vague definition, I find. What really sets it apart from a > web page or web site, for example? Those have constituent resources, are > uniquely identifiable and viewable using OWP technologies. It also leaves > open the question of what "organized together" means. > > > > I hate writing quick responses to terminology, but something like the > following would be more where my thinking is: > > > > A Web Publication (WP) is a representation of an artistic or intellectual > work using Open Web Platform technologies. It is defined by a collection of > constituent resources linked together through a manifest. > > > > Matt > > > > *From:* Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken [mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com] > *Sent:* July 24, 2017 1:04 PM > *To:* W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org> > *Subject:* definition of Web Publication > > > > The DPUB IG proposed a definition of Web Publications [1, 2] > > > > Here are the short definitions. Please see [1] for the longer definition. > > > > · A Web Publication (WP) is a collection of one or more constituent > resources, organized together in a uniquely identifiable grouping that may > be presented using standard Open Web Platform technologies. > > · A Packaged Web Publication (PWP) is a Web Publication > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fpwp%2F%23dfn-web-publication&data=02%7C01%7C%7C96b69b9e923b44adb55908d4d2e1e13a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636365314963898112&sdata=78TTzB3d9xd2MGb4e8E8LfuPFXJHErBd%2FTXUuCtjFzc%3D&reserved=0> > whose constituent resources are combined into a single distributable file, > using some standard packaging format. > > · In this document, manifest refers to an abstract means to contain > information necessary to the proper management, rendering, and so on, of a > publication. This is opposed to metadata that contains information on the > content of the publication like author, publication date, and so on. The > precise format of how such a manifest is stored is not considered in this > document. > > > > If you are happy with these definitions, a simple +1 vote is sufficient. > If you are not, please vote -1 and propose revisions. > > > > Thank you, > > > > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/pwp/#whatisawebpublication > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fpwp%2F%23whatisawebpublication&data=02%7C01%7C%7C96b69b9e923b44adb55908d4d2e1e13a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636365314963898112&sdata=%2B0xPJGjK4CsEdtsCyGdPAaC5wVHtCpKCKvV6%2FDJ0%2Bik%3D&reserved=0> > > [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/pwp/#terminology > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fpwp%2F%23terminology&data=02%7C01%7C%7C96b69b9e923b44adb55908d4d2e1e13a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636365314963898112&sdata=YvcFmBoAzRNPjYmroLVPb%2BZG19nahTIxbCps7dkn0Ek%3D&reserved=0> > > > > *Tzviya Siegman* > > Information Standards Lead > > Wiley > > 201-748-6884 <(201)%20748-6884> > > tsiegman@wiley.com > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 25 July 2017 03:43:34 UTC