-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
ISO Standardization Discussion
Warning: The content of this wiki page is very outdated.
I am creating this page as a placeholder for the discussions.
- Accessibility standards used worldwide for publications
- W3C incorporates accessibility standards in publishing (included in WCAG)
- ISO has the same accessibility requirements
- Avoid forking and different requirements.
I am writing this mail to request further consideration of ISO/IEC standardization of EPUB and EPUB Accessibility. I am wondering if we can make a joint proposal to the CG, Publishing BG and its steering committee.
As I wrote before, Prof. Jun Ishikawa (Member of the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Chair Person of the Commission on Disability Policy, Cabinet Office, Japan, and the Chief Director, Association of Higher Education and Disability, Japan) requested me to create an International Standard for EPUB Accessibility, since the Japanese government does not consider Technical Specifications as de jure standards. I guess that the same thing applies to some other governments.
Hereafter, IS stands for International Standards and TS stands for Technical Specifications.
1: Publishing EPUB 3.0.1 as a collection of ISs
As long as EPUB 3.0.1 is a collection of TSs, EPUB Accessibility cannot become an IS. Thus, we hope to create ISs for EPUB 3.0.1.
Now, the ballot for creating TSs for EPUB 3.0.1 has started. The Japanese mirror for SC34 has decided to vote No and request for ISs for EPUB 3.0.1. The Japanese mirrors for IEC TC100/TA10 and ISO TC46 might do the same thing. After the ballot is closed (on September 7), there will be a comment disposition meeting in SC34/JWG7.
The easiest approach for creating ISs for EPUB 3.0.1 is fast-track submission by Korea. Since EPUB 3.0.1 is already a Korean national standard, Korea has the rights to use the fast-track procedure. This is not at all difficult for Korea. Another approach is to use the normal procedure. This approach requires a lot of rewrite, since conformance to ISO/IEC Directives Part 2 (Style guidelines) is required. I hope to avoid this approach, if possible.
2: Publishing EPUB Accessibility as an IS
As we have discussed before, we cannot use the fast-track procedure or PAS procedure, anyway. The only possibility is the normal procedure. Thus, conformance to ISO/IEC Directives Part 2 (Style guidelines) is required. (Good news: ISO is likely to allow PDF files.)
Even if we use the normal procedure, it is possible to make the IS freely available. This is demonstrated by
- Associating Schemas with XML documents 1.0 by W3C, and
- ISO/IEC 19757-11:2011.
Japanese SC34 (which I convene) is willing to submit a new work item proposal for standardizing EPUB Accessibility as an IS to SC34.
I am sure that you have many questions. Perhaps, a teleconference among us would work?
Looking forward to your reply.
Regards,
Makoto
The PBG-SC asked Rick, Luc, and George to list the options surrounding ISO standardization. This follows from the discussion on the SC call on August 22.
There are three specifications under discussion, EPUB 3.01 , 3.1, and the epub Accessibility Specification 1.0. EPUB 3.0 is already an ISO Technical Specification (TS), which was originally initiated by Korea. Korea has submitted EPUB 3.0.1 to ISO as a TS.
ISO/IEC 40500:2012 - Information technology -- W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0
Direct link is: https://www.iso.org/standard/58625.html
Try to move EPUB 3.0.1 forward in ISO as an International Standard (IS). Simultaneously submit the EPUB Accessibility Specification 1.0 forward as a IS.
Pros: Since EPUB 3.0.1 is a Korean standard, the standardization of 3.0.1 as an IS is easy. Korea can submit a fast-tracked DIS.
Cons: The standardization of EPUB 3.0.1 may undermine EPUB 3.1 (Note: In the case of UML and ODF, ISO was always years behind forums.)
Disconnect the EPUB Accessibility Specification from moving EPUB 3.x forward under ISO, and move the EPUB Accessibility Specification 1.0 forward as an IS.
Reactions: EPUB Accessibility Specification 1.0 was designed to be applied to all versions of EPUB 2 and EPUB 3. It is a relatively short specification, because it points to WCAG 2.0 and only adds the items essential to publishing not covered in WCAG. The technical writing involved in updating the EPUB Accessibility Specification from 1.0 to a 1.1 using ISO appropriate language would not be that much work. However, the ISO IS process is long and would involve reacting to comments, revising, and re-submitting, which probably would take more than a year.
It was pointed out that an ISO IS cannot reference non-recognized standards. Because the EPUB Accessibility spec references EPUB, which is not a recognized approved standard, this would be impossible. It might be possible to recast the EPUB Accessibility specification to be generic and not reference EPUB normatively, but the examples could use EPUB.
Move the EPUB Accessibility Specification 1.0 forward as a TS.
Reactions: Much less work and time, but a TS does not hold sufficient weight in the international community to be referenced by organizations. This means the EU may move forward with its own work to create a publishing accessibility specification.
Standardization of EPUB 3.1 (including EPUB Accessibility) as an IS thus superseding the existing TS for 3.0.
Pros: Sufficient weight for EPUB Accessibility.
Pros: EPUB 3.1 is the latest EPUB specification.
Cons: Existing EPUB publications containing version="3.0" will not conform to any ISO specification. Since almost all Japanese EPUB publications contain "3.0", Japanese publishers oppose to this option strongly.
Cons: Although EPUB 3.1 is the latest EPUB specification, it has not been widely used. Note that epubcheck does not support it. ISO Standardization of such an unused specification is doubtful.
Parallel standardization of EPUB 3.0.1 and 3.1 (except accessibility), and also standardization of EPUB Accessibility as an IS. The target of EPUB 3.0.1 and EPUB Accessibility is an IS. The target 3.1 (except accessibility) may be an TS or IS.
Pros: All pros of the other options.
Cons: More work than the other options.
The PBG SC suggested that it was wise to exercise due diligence in making our recommendations on ISO standardization. The biggest concern is by moving EPUB 3.01 forward as an ISO International Standard (IS), we may inadvertently delay or stop adoption of EPUB 3.1. There is no intention to undermine EPUB 3.1 and activities in the EPUB 3 Community Group are targeted to support developments and adoption.
Once reviewed, the following questions will be put into an accessible Survey Monkey format. The PBG membership would then distribute the link to the survey to individuals that could provide their guidance.
Friends of EPUB are being asked to provide guidance on choices moving forward with EPUB standardization under ISO. Currently, EPUB 3.0 is an ISO Technical Specification (TS). The decision to move in this direction was in part due to EPUB 3.0 at that time referenced drafts of HTML 5, which prevented EPUB 3.0 from being an ISO International Standard (IS).
International standard is usually preferred because it provides more weight in international community than the technical specification, at the same time it also requires more time and efforts.
Some important points to consider:
- Now that HTML 5 is an approved W3C Recommendation, more options are open for EPUB specifications in ISO.
- EPUB 3.01 and EPUB 3.1 were developed under the IDPF and submitted to W3C as member submission, which does not provide the rec track status to EPUB 3.0.1 and 3.1.
- EPUB accessibility conformance and discovery specifications is very important for ensuring accessibility in publications, but it was also developed under IDPF and is not having rec track status in W3C. We need to add more weight to this specification to gain recognition from national and regional governments.
- EPUB 3.0.1 is adopted quite well while the adoption of EPUB 3.1 is in initial stages, ISO standardization of latest specification is preferred, but Better adoption of a specification gathers more support for ISO standardization.
Therefore, to provide more weight to the EPUB 3 specifications, we are seeking guidance on the direction we should take.
Please complete this one page survey by dd/mm/yyyy, which will help guide us in our decisions. We will keep this confidential.
Your name: [text box]
Your organization/company: [textbox]
Your email: [text box]
Q1: The status quo is that EPUB 3 is ISO Technical Specification (TS), and EPUB 3.0.1 is also submitted to ISO as Technical Specification, so EPUB 3.0.1 would become a technical specification until and unless we take some action. If EPUB 3.0.1 is moved forward under ISO now as International Standard (IS), instead of (TS) while communicating the roadmap of ISO standardization of EPUB 3.1, would this have worse effect on the adoption of EPUB 3.1 as compared to status co?
[Radio buttons]
- No, EPUB 3.0.1 as “IS” would not impact EPUB 3.1 adoption more than EPUB 3.0.1 as “TS”.
- Yes, adoption of EPUB 3.1 would be delayed.
- Difficult to judge.
Comments [edit box]:
Q2: Should the EPUB Accessibility Conformance and Discovery Specification be moved forward under ISO?
[Radio buttons]
- Yes
- No
Comments: [text box]
Q3: Should EPUB Accessibility Conformance and Discovery specification be moved under ISO as International Standard (IS) or Technical Specification (TS)? Note: EPUB accessibility specification has dependency on EPUB, which is currently a technical specification. So, for making EPUB accessibility specifications an International Standard, the EPUB specifications should also become International Standard.
[radio buttons]
- EPUB accessibility specifications should become international Standard in parallel with EPUB 3.0.1
- EPUB accessibility specification should be a Technical Specification
Comments text box:
Q4: When should we move EPUB 3.1 forward in ISO? [Radio buttons]
- It should be moved forward in parallel to EPUB 3.0.1.
- We should move EPUB 3.1 into ISO when there is more uptake in the industry and the essential tools like EPUBCheck support EPUB 3.1.
- Difficult to suggest the right time to do it.
Comments text box:
Q5: Should EPUB 3.0.1/3.1 be moved forward under ISO as an International Standard (IS) or as a Technical Specification [TS]. International Standard is considered to carry more weight, but also requires more work.)
[Radio buttons]
- International Standard is preferred.
- Technical Specification is sufficient.
Comments text box:
Q6: Any other suggestion?
[text box]