- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 08:58:26 +0200
- To: Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>
- Cc: Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org>, W3C Public Archives <www-archive@w3.org>, W3C Chairs of EPUB 3 WG <group-epub-wg-chairs@w3.org>, Philippe le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>
- Message-Id: <D463057D-84D0-4B7D-BD92-A87D72282E90@w3.org>
Thanks Matt. I am happy to yield to you for the various details, I only acted as a go-between. One remark, though: > On 8 Sep 2021, at 22:35, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com> wrote: > > The odd thing in this case is that the same people primarily responsible for > developing the accessibility metadata in schema.org are the same people > working on the EPUB accessibility specification. I was the editor of the > schema.org proposal, for example, working for Benetech at the time. Charles > Lapierre, George Kerscher, and Avneesh Singh were also all involved in the > original proposal and are members of the WG, and Madeleine Rothberg > represented IMS and continues to work with us on the metadata and > implementing it in EPUB. > > So in that sense, we know that the metadata itself is stable, as we're still > the primary maintainers even if the charter/funding of the original grouping > has lapsed. We've been using the EPUB/publishing accessibility groups as a > meeting space over the years. > > That said, we're currently working to create a more formal maintenance > structure, most likely a W3C community group similar to how schema.org > itself is maintained, as everyone recognizes the web schemas wiki page is > dated, insufficient to the task, and lacks a formal update policy (that > "issue tracker" link is a relic of some really old email discussions, as > we've been logging issues in the publishing accessibility group's tracker[1] > until we find a more permanent home). It exists because that's where we were > pointed to document the properties when we first proposed them. > > That said, the reason why we don't reference the properties directly in the > specification is entirely related to the process we had to follow to get 1.0 > of the specification through ISO standardization. The original IDPF version > has the schema.org properties listed, but ISO would not recognize the > vocabulary as a referenceable standard so the only workaround was prose > descriptions. I'm sure everyone in the group would like to go back to > referencing the properties directly again, as the current situation does > nothing but add confusion. We didn't think it was an option in W3C, either, > however. > > Assuming schema.org in itself isn't a barrier to being cited normatively, is > the only need here to prove that the accessibility metadata itself is > stable? If so, then I suppose the next step is to expedite the move to form > a maintenance community group (cc'ing Avneesh). To avoid unnecessary administration: wouldn't it be possible for the EPUB WG to formally take over the maintenance via some process? After all, the EPUB WG is now the guardian of the A11y EPUB document… Ivan > Given that we've been > maintaining the metadata for years, and are known to the schema.org > maintainers as the owners of the metadata, would formalizing the group prove > sufficient stability? > > [1] > https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Atype- > schema.org > > Matt > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org> > Sent: September 8, 2021 5:05 PM > To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> > Cc: W3C Public Archives <www-archive@w3.org>; W3C Chairs of EPUB 3 WG > <group-epub-wg-chairs@w3.org>; Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>; > Philippe le Hégaret <plh@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Normative reference to schema.org in EPUB Accessibility? > > > > On 2021-09-08 09:37 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: >> Ralph, Philippe, >> >> this type of question comes up regularly, but I did not see any clear >> cut answer. > > There's no absolute determination in advance; this is intentional. Each > case has its own considerations. > >> The EPUB Accessibility spec[1] has a section on package metadata[2] to >> refer to metadata like access mode or accessibility features. The >> specification defines these terms in general, meaning that it is not >> properly defined which terms are to be used in a real metadata >> instantiation; this is left to the separate WG Note on a11y >> techniques[3] which reveals the thinly veiled fact that, in practice, > > "thinly veiled" is a big flag for me. The spec should be clear and as > precise as possible about the Working Group's intentions. If the WG intends > that the conformance expectations for an eventual W3C Recommendation > maximize interoperability with specific metadata usage it should state so. > If it believes that the schema.org terms and their definitions are the > correct solution, it should state so -- and be prepared to argue its > position with the Director, the W3C Members, and the Community. > >> these general terms refer to their equivalents in schema.org >> <http://schema.org>[4]. Indeed, all the terms defined in [2] are, >> actually, defined in schema.org <http://schema.org>, and those are the >> only mappings for those terms. Those terms are not out of the blue, >> actually: they have been developed, originally, in cooperation with >> the IMS Global[5] and are now maintained on [6]. > > "maintained on [6]" does give me pause. [6] does not state a maintenance > policy and refers to an issue tracker that uses the pronoun "I" in many > places, including its Resolved Issues section, and was last modified on 5 > January 2018. The parent page (WebSchemas) is explicitly disclaimed as > "left primarily for historical record". Is this in fact the authoritative > place for maintaining the current accessibility vocabulary? > >> The reason of this somewhat weird setting in [2] is to avoid >> normatively referring to schema.org <http://schema.org>. > > If the WG believes such a normative reference is what the Web needs, it > should not shy away from stating that. > >> Actually, the >> accessibility spec has an earlier version published at the ISO, and in >> ISO land it was a clear no-no to do so. However, W3C is meant to be >> more flexible and therefore the question does arise. However, our >> document on normative references[7] is not 100% clear cut for me. >> >> Hence this mail: does W3C has an official position as for a normative >> reference to schema.org <http://schema.org> terms? > > In this, as in many things, if the WG is able to obtain a clear and > authoritative statement on the stability of the parts it wants to > normatively reference, the organization (or community) who "owns" that > stability, and the open process by which the referenced material is > maintained, that is important to the Director's consideration. > >> Specifically, is it >> possible to simplify [1] and make a clear reference to schema.org >> <http://schema.org> instead of the hand-weaving approach we have there >> currently? In case of a positive answer, can we, possibly, add a >> reference to schema.org <http://schema.org> in [7] just as we do with >> the WhatWG? > > It depends on the answers to the questions above (and maybe other questions > that could arise) :) > > -Ralph > >> Thanks for your help >> >> Ivan >> >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-a11y-11/ >> <https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-a11y-11/> >> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-a11y-11/#sec-disc-package >> <https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-a11y-11/#sec-disc-package> >> [3] https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-a11y-tech-11/#meta-002 >> <https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-a11y-11/#sec-disc-package> >> [4] https://schema.org/accessMode <https://schema.org/accessMode> [5] >> http://www.imsglobal.org/activity/accessibility >> <http://www.imsglobal.org/activity/accessibility> >> [6] https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Accessibility >> <https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Accessibility> >> [7] https://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references >> <https://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references> >> >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/> >> mobile: +33 6 52 46 00 43 >> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 >> <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704> >> > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +33 6 52 46 00 43 ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Received on Thursday, 9 September 2021 06:58:33 UTC