search

w3c / publ-maintenance-wg-charter

Initial version of the Publication Maintenance WG charter
https://w3c.github.io/publ-maintenance-wg-charter/
3 stars 1 forks source link

EPUBCheck clarification #31

Closed rickj closed 3 days ago

rickj commented 1 month ago

If we are making changes to EPUB, there needs to be clarity about necessary changes to EPUBCheck. Before we go to an AC vote on the charter we should include some plan, or direction, or assurances about how EPUBCheck will be updated.

As a simple statement: EPUB is maintained by the W3C. The validator for EPUB... {this is where we need clarity!}

iherman commented 1 month ago

As a data point: the original charter for the EPUB Working group had this item for its success criteria:

  • Validation tools such as EPUBCheck fully support EPUB 3.X.

With the template of today, this could mean adding this remark to the success criteria section of the new charter.

iherman commented 3 weeks ago

Discussed at WG: https://w3c.github.io/pm-wg/minutes/2024-11-01.html#i31

iherman commented 2 weeks ago

PR has been raised (#50) following the Steering Committee discussion.

GeorgeKerscher commented 2 weeks ago

We discussed this requirement on the Publishing Steering Committee today. Many of the people voiced support for having the requirement to update epubcheck in the charter. We noted that without epubcheck, adoption of any new specification would fail.

mattgarrish commented 1 week ago

(Sorry for the duplication, but I noticed that I posted this to the closed pull request.)

Is it worth noting somewhere in the charter that this group should be logging all issues that affect conformance in the epubcheck tracker, not just that epubcheck should get updated? I tried to keep on top of this during 3.3, and we did a pretty extensive review while testing the assertions of the specification, but it's a huge headache if it's not always front of mind as we're working.

GeorgeKerscher commented 1 week ago

Yes, I think it is worth noting in the charter that items that are expected to impact epubcheck should be tracked in the epubcheck repo.

It is better that the community owns this instead of leaving it up to one or two people.

iherman commented 1 week ago

(Sorry for the duplication, but I noticed that I posted this to the closed pull request.)

Is it worth noting somewhere in the charter that this group should be logging all issues that affect conformance in the epubcheck tracker, not just that epubcheck should get updated? I tried to keep on top of this during 3.3, and we did a pretty extensive review while testing the assertions of the specification, but it's a huge headache if it's not always front of mind as we're working.

Maybe the right place to put this is the liaison statement to the epubcheck community. WDYT?

mattgarrish commented 1 week ago

Maybe the right place to put this is the liaison statement to the epubcheck community.

I actually wonder if it should be part of the success criteria statement? We cover a lot of testing needs, for example. Maybe something like:

All changes that add, remove, or clarify publication conformance requirements are also logged in the EPUBCheck tracker as they are addressed, and EPUBCheck is updated to fully support EPUB 3.4.

rickj commented 1 week ago

If you are going to call out EPUB 3.4, then don't forget the ISO EPUB/A

iherman commented 1 week ago

If you are going to call out EPUB 3.4, then don't forget the ISO EPUB/A

I am sorry @rickj , I do not understand the reference to ISO vs EPUBCheck...

iherman commented 1 week ago

Maybe the right place to put this is the liaison statement to the epubcheck community.

I actually wonder if it should be part of the success criteria statement? We cover a lot of testing needs, for example. Maybe something like:

All changes that add, remove, or clarify publication conformance requirements are also logged in the EPUBCheck tracker as they are addressed, and EPUBCheck is updated to fully support EPUB 3.4.

It looks a bit strange as a success criterion... but I am not against it.

Can you create a PR to make things quicker?

rickj commented 1 week ago

If you are going to call out EPUB 3.4, then don't forget the ISO EPUB/A

I am sorry @rickj , I do not understand the reference to ISO vs EPUBCheck...

Just pointing out that if we are calling out specific versions of EPUB as a success criteria, we will need to ensure EPUBcheck validates EPUB/A. While it should do that... it should not be assumed.

mattgarrish commented 1 week ago

It looks a bit strange as a success criterion...

Ya, maybe it can be integrated with testing under the interop goal.

Can you create a PR to make things quicker?

Sure, let me see what I can do to improve it and I'll open a pr.

iherman commented 1 week ago

If you are going to call out EPUB 3.4, then don't forget the ISO EPUB/A

I am sorry @rickj , I do not understand the reference to ISO vs EPUBCheck...

Just pointing out that if we are calling out specific versions of EPUB as a success criteria, we will need to ensure EPUBcheck validates EPUB/A. While it should do that... it should not be assumed.

I am not familiar with all the details about epubcheck-EPUB A11y, but the line I have put into the charter essentially the same line as what we had in the EPUB charter...

@mattgarrish you probably are more familiar with that part of the game.

mattgarrish commented 1 week ago

am not familiar with all the details about epubcheck-EPUB A11y

EPUB/A is the archiving spec that they're just getting started with, not the accessibility spec.

Since it's not being done in W3C, can we commit to updating epubcheck in our charter? If we were chartering epubcheck it would make perfect sense, but I'm not sure how it fits in the scope of this group.

iherman commented 1 week ago

am not familiar with all the details about epubcheck-EPUB A11y

EPUB/A is the archiving spec that they're just getting started with, not the accessibility spec.

Oops, sorry, my bad.

Since it's not being done in W3C, can we commit to updating epubcheck in our charter? If we were chartering epubcheck it would make perfect sense, but I'm not sure how it fits in the scope of this group.

Absolutely. What epubcheck does w.r.t. EPUB/A is up to the epubcheck community, which is not under the control of this Working Group. Consequently, we should not put anything into the charter imho.

wareid commented 1 week ago

Agree with Ivan that we don't need to tie EPUB/A to the charter, we should definitely keep liaising with that work, and we're already mentioning our efforts with ISO for EPUB 3.3, which is related as well.