Re: Increasing the gap between web and publishing or unifying them?

Makoto,

Thanks for that list; just a minor thoughts.

Some of the entries on your list[2] should be covered, I believe, by the Publishing WG:

- Metadata for the entire publication
- spine
- epub:type (via the DPUB-ARIA work)
- package rendering metadata (maybe, I am not sure)

The alternate style tag is clearly beyond the charter of that group and, I *think* (but not sure) so is the initial containing block; this is probably to be seen with the CSS WG.

SMIL is a very different issue. At the moment, SMIL is not 'dead', insofar as the standard has never been rescinded, for example. The problem is a complete lack of implementation in browser-land, so it is probably worth having a separate CG (or similar), including browser vendors, to understand the reasons for the lack of implementations and whether something can be done within the framework of the existing spec. (And what to do if not.)

Thanks

Ivan


> On 8 Jun 2017, at 02:49, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp <mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>> wrote:
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> The whole point of the unification of IDPF and W3C is to
> unify the web world and the publishing world.  But I am wondering
> if we are rather increasing the gap between the two worlds.
> 
> See
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/publ-cg/issues/11 <https://github.com/w3c/publ-cg/issues/11>
> 
> I think that we should not
> 
> 1) Create an EPUB-specific CSS extension
> 2) Introduce more FXL metadata
> 
> People appear to agree that 1) is bad.  But I think that
> 2) is also equally bad.  Remember that some FXL
> metadata  (e.g, rendition:align-x-center) has not been
> widely implemented.  Even when they are implemented
> in EPUB, the OWP does not have equivalent features.
> 
> I would like to recommend two actions.
> 
> First, we  should provide a detailed prioritized requirement list
> and request the CSS WG to address them. Paged media should
> be top in the list.  A recent submission [1] by Vivliostyle is hopefully
> useful.
> 
> Second, we should study EPUB features (e.g., media overlay)
> missing in OWP, and request the entire W3C to address them.
> See my list [2] of such features.
> 
> Regards,
> Makoto
> 
> [1] https://www.w3.org/Submission/2017/01/ <https://www.w3.org/Submission/2017/01/>
> [2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MY_qIkT8AD6m-M4mEUy7dr3jTH56Eiafdj6E2X6FsIQ/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MY_qIkT8AD6m-M4mEUy7dr3jTH56Eiafdj6E2X6FsIQ/edit>
> 
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>