Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move renditions terminology and requirements to multiple renditions document #1448

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 17, 2020

Conversation

mattgarrish
Copy link
Member

@mattgarrish mattgarrish commented Dec 16, 2020

This PR picks up from #1438 with a more complete rewrite of the specifications. The primary changes include:

  • Rewriting the specifications not to use the term renditions.
  • Moving the rendition definitions, examples and requirements in the core specification to multiple renditions specification.
  • Adding a new background section to multiple renditions document to explain their history and purpose.
  • Reduce the overuse of the phrasing "of the EPUB Publication" to avoid misunderstandings.
  • Clean up/move the unique and release identifier sections into the package document definition.
  • Move the release identifier processing to RS spec.

Probably the key section to look at is the publication conformance: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/epub-specs/editorial/issue-1436/epub33/core/index.html#sec-epub-conf

I've tried to retain the original requirement of multiple packages each with its own package document and nav doc but without using the old terminology. There's also a note in the package document intro about multiple package documents being allowed.

The other key section is the container.xml file definition: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/epub-specs/editorial/issue-1436/epub33/core/index.html#sec-container-metainf-container.xml

The multiple renditions document has a couple of new sections to deal with material that is better explained in it: the section on expressing multiple renditions and the clarification that renditions can each contain unique metadata in their package documents.

Otherwise, the rest of the changes are primarily editorial in nature. Everything that was allowed before is still allowed, but this should make the core specification simpler to read.

Fixes #1436
Fixes #1442


Preview | Diff

add rendition definitions, examples and requirements to multiple renditions specification;
add a new background section to multiple renditions spec to explain their purpose;
reduce overuse of the phrasing "of the EPUB Publication";
clean up the unique and release identifier sections;
move release identifier processing to RS spec;
@mattgarrish
Copy link
Member Author

Additional previews:

Copy link
Member

@iherman iherman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe something should be added to the changes section about the moving of multiple rendition into a separate document. This is, though editorial, a substantial change...

@mattgarrish
Copy link
Member Author

mattgarrish commented Dec 16, 2020

Right, I'm getting annoyed with putting those in right now as they keep causing merge conflicts with any other open pull requests that have entries. I'm going to add the change log text after merging until we get the open list of PRs back under control.

@iherman
Copy link
Member

iherman commented Dec 16, 2020

@mattgarrish maybe we should use the labels to see which PR-s affect which documents; with a growing number of PR-s this may become messy. We should also try to merge most of them before going FPWD...

(Except for a11y, whose FPWD is later.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Mention multiple renditions without describing them in detail Remove multiple renditions from EPUB 3.3
5 participants