Hi Leonard,
In my mind “into a single logical work” does not equal “into a single
package or file”.
But, I think we're in agreement conceptually. Let's leave to Matt to draft
perfectly! :-)
Best,
Garth
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > A web publication of Moby-Dick may have 136 separate HTML files, but
> it's still a single web publication, and a single logical work. I don't
> believe this statement implies otherwise.
>
>
>
> Yes, that was the intent. As I mentioned to Luc, making clear the
> connectedness of the documents would further help differentiate a
> publication from a random set of documents. Their being connected in no way
> implies packaging, as having bounds doesn't necessitate packaging.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* Dave Cramer [mailto:dauwhe@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* July 26, 2017 6:03 PM
> *To:* Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
> *Cc:* Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com>; George Kerscher <
> kerscher@montana.com>; Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>; AUDRAIN LUC
> <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>; Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>; Garth
> Conboy <garth@google.com>; Laurent Le Meur <laurent.lemeur@edrlab.org>;
> Greg Albers <GAlbers@getty.edu>; public-publ-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: definition of Web Publication
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
> wrote:
>
> > bound together through a manifest into a single logical work
>
> >
>
> That says packaged! And, IMO, we need to be VERY CLEAR for WP that we
> are **not** talking about packaging. If nothing else, get rid of the
> “into a single logical work”.
>
>
>
> I think this just expresses the notion that a web publication represents a
> single conceptual work, and that the abstract manifest serves to unite the
> components in a logical sense. I don't see this implying that a web
> publication is a single web resource or file.
>
>
>
> A web publication of Moby-Dick may have 136 separate HTML files, but it's
> still a single web publication, and a single logical work. I don't believe
> this statement implies otherwise.
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>