Addition of "EPUB 3 Text-to-Speech Enhancements 1.0"

[murata2makoto]

I think that EPUB 3 Text-to-Speech Enhancements 1.0 should be added in 3.2.

[iherman]

@murata2makoto, there are currently 7 active WG notes under the "control" of the EPUB WG, and one more under the "control" of the Publishing WG. There is no reason to make an exhaustive list of those in the charter; the introductory text says (emphasis is mine):

Other non-normative documents may be created and/or maintained such as:

I have picked the one from the Audiobooks and, somewhat arbitrarily, one from the EPUB related list (probably the one which has the highest interest in practice). I would prefer to stop there, not to overcomplicated the charter text.

(Nothing against TTS, of course.)

[murata2makoto]

@iherman

This feature is used by Japanese textbook publishers but is nevertheless dropped from EPUB 3.3 for the lack of world-wide implementations. I strongly want to have this spec on the list.

[iherman]

@iherman

This feature is used by Japanese textbook publishers but is nevertheless dropped from EPUB 3.3 for the lack of world-wide implementations. I strongly want to have this spec on the list.

I presume you mean 3.2, which is a list for "maintaining notes". You seem to argue that you would want it as part of the Rec, which is not a statement that should be done in the charter. Note that the WG decision is that substantial changes on the EPUB 3.3 standard would have to go through a complete FPWD->WG draft->CR->PR->Rec route, which may not be under the purview of this Working Group anyway (i.e., a new charter would be necessary).

Bottom line: I do not know what you intend to achieve by adding a new item to this list (I am obviously concerned that we will end up listing all the 7+1 note references, which I think will just complicate the charter review.)

[murata2makoto]

I am not arguing for incorporating this note as part of 3.4 (at least now). I would like the charter to clearly allow possible maintenance of this note especially when APA finalizes "Specification for Spoken Presentation in HTML". #13

[iherman]

I would like the charter to clearly allow possible maintenance of this note especially when APA finalizes "Specification for Spoken Presentation in HTML".

But that is exactly what the introductory paragraph says, which refers to all notes published by the earlier Working Groups, with this note being part of the "such as"...

I am sorry, @murata2makoto we seem to mutually misunderstand one another here. Again, I do not know what you intend to achieve (and which is not already in the text) by adding this item to the list.

[murata2makoto]

@iherman

Then, why does 3.2 reference notes? Some are very important but not all of them, as I see it.

[iherman]

Then, why does 3.2 reference notes? Some are very important but not all of them, as I see it.

First of all, it refers to two notes only + the documents on testing (EPUB and audiobooks, respectively; testing maintenance is also referred to in the charter). LPF is the only note published with by the audiobooks wg, that is why it is important to get it there. As a matter of equity between the two originating working groups, this leads to pick one note out of the ones listed on the EPUB WG's list. Maybe I am wrong, but I regard the A11y techniques' document is probably the most widely used and most important note among those. That is how we got to what we have.

Aren't we bike shedding at this point?

[murata2makoto]

Aren't we bike shedding at this point?

The use of SSML and PLS is crucial for Japanese textbooks (unless the voice is included). Although I certainly think that the A11Y techniques document is important, I would argue that this note is more important for Japanese textbooks.

[shiestyle]

@murata2makoto Japanese textbooks is one of the categories in publishing industry, even in Japan.

Although TTS in Japan will be more important after EPUB 3.3 is published, I don’t think it is necessary to pick up as an example in this charter.

I agree with Ivan’s explanation.

[mattgarrish]

This sounds like an issue of exposing all the work of the various groups better. We've talked about having a page that lists all the REC track docs, WG Notes, CG Final Reports, etc. that the various publishing groups have created so you don't have to go hunting for them. I'm all for that, but a charter document isn't a helpful place to have it.

[murata2makoto]

Japanese textbooks is one of the categories in publishing industry, even in Japan.

True. It is also true that no trade book publishers in Japan create textbooks and no textbook publishers in Japan create trade books. This is special in Japan.

[murata2makoto]

This sounds like an issue of exposing all the work of the various groups better. We've talked about having a page that lists all the REC track docs, WG Notes, CG Final Reports, etc. that the various publishing groups have created so you don't have to go hunting for them. I'm all for that, but a charter document isn't a helpful place to have it.

Matt, JDC is involved in creating DAISY textbooks in Japan. Since TTS is so error-prone in Japan, DAISY textbooks have recorded voice always. Creating such DAISY textbooks is a significant burden to volunteers. Meanwhile, textbook publishers in Japan started to use PLS and SSML recently.

I have always thought that Publishing@W3C does not understand the current situation in Japanese textbook publishing well and pays too little attention to PLS/SSML. It is not merely one of the many specifications. It is much more important than that.

[shiestyle]

@murata2makoto Even if TTS is important in Japan, it will not be the most important issue in accessibility area for publishing in global.

At least in Japan, TTS is a small part of issues in publishing industry, and your claim doesn’t seem to make sense.

[murata2makoto]

@shiestyle

s/publishing industry/tradebook publishing industry/

[shiestyle]

@murata2makoto Textbook publishers are part of publishers in Japan, right? Even if TTS for textbook publishers is more important than for tradebook publishers, TTS will not be the most important issue for all publishers in Japan and also in global, because the market and readers who need it are not large.

If we will follow your logic (important in a specific area is important globally), we cannot give priorities properly. You should show the reason why TTS is more important than EPUB-A11Y Techniques and the critical influence when TTS is not listed in the charter.

[murata2makoto]

Textbook publishers are part of publishers in Japan, right?

This list of board members of "Digital Publishers Federation of Japan" has no textbook publishers. Meanwhile, the list of board members of "Textbook Publishing Association of Japan" has no trade book publishers.

TTS will not be the most important issue for all publishers in Japan and also in global, because the market and readers who need it are not large.

I understand that this is your position. Is this also the position of your company or Japanese trade book publishers in general?

[shiestyle]

@murata2makoto I just sent what you should answer and don’t reply questions to questions.

Anyway, it’s not my position but a fact that readers who need TTS is smaller than who don’t need.

And a specific industry group without textbook publishers will not define that textbook publishers are not publishers in Japan. It seems a common sense.