Re: Conditions for not raising formal objections

2018年11月28日(水) 10:45 Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com>:

> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 8:04 PM MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
> wrote:
>
>> If there is a new charter for the EPUB 3.2 REC, it
>> should guarantee that widely used features will not
>> be dropped even if they have interoperability problems.
>> If this is not guaranteed, I will seriously think about
>> formal objections from Japanese publishers.  Indeed,
>> Japanese publishers use non-interoperable features
>> by avoiding risky cases.
>>
>>
> Makoto,
>
> How interoperability is demonstrated is described in the W3C Process
> document
> https://www.w3.org/2018/Process-20180201/#implementation-experience
>
> > Implementation experience is required to show that a specification is
> sufficiently clear, complete, and relevant to market needs, to ensure that
> independent interoperable implementations of each feature of the
> specification will be realized. While no exhaustive list of requirements is
> provided here, when assessing that there is adequate implementation
> experience the Director will consider (though not be limited to):
>
> > * is each feature of the current specification implemented, and how is
> this demonstrated?
> > * are there independent interoperable implementations of the current
> specification?
> > * are there implementations created by people other than the authors of
> the specification?
> > * are implementations publicly deployed?
> > * is there implementation experience at all levels of the
> specification's ecosystem (authoring, consuming, publishing…)?
> > * are there reports of difficulties or problems with implementation?
>
> > * Planning and accomplishing a demonstration of (interoperable)
> implementations can be very time consuming. Groups are often able to work
> more effectively if they plan how they will demonstrate interoperable
> implementations early in the development process; for example, developing
> tests in concert with implementation efforts.
>
> I believe we will have lots of problems if we write a charter saying that
> our specification plans to include features that do not have independent
> interoperable implementations. That goes against the very nature of what
> W3C does.
>

Dave,

Then, I continue to consider EPUB 3.2 as a risk rather than
a chance.  I also think that the W3C process is inappropriate
for publishing, since it pays little attention to longevity and
too much attention to interoperability.


> But as I've said before, I do not think this will be a problem for EPUB.
> The problems you mention are with CSS, and we are not going to profile CSS
> in EPUB based on test suite results from CSS Writing Modes 3. We are also
> not going to program EPUBCheck to reject files that contain characters that
> may have improper rotations applied via text-orientation.
>

Here is a list of EPUB features in the EBPAJ profile.  Can the recharter
proposal ensure that none of them will be dropped?

@page-progression-direction
@linear
properties="page-spread-right" and properties="page-spread-left"
dc:title, dc:creator, dc:publisher, dc:language, dc:identifier
properties="nav" and properties="cover-image"
property="role", property="file-as", and property="display-seq
<meta property="rendition:layout">pre-paginated</meta>
<meta property="rendition:spread">landscape</meta>
navigarion documents

CSS Text Level 3 -epub-line-break / -epub-word-break / -epub-text-align-last

CSS Writing Modes Module Level 3 -epub-writing-mode /
-epub-text-orientation / -epub-text-combine -epub-text-combine-horizontal

CSS Fonts Level 3 @font-face (font-family / font-style / font-weight / src
/ unicode-range)

CSS Text Decoration Level 3 -epub-text-emphasis / -epub-text-emphasis-color
/ -epub-text-emphasis-style -epub-text-underline-position

Regards,
Makoto


> Dave
>
>
>

-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto