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

incorporating DAISY/schema.org accessibility information #278

Open
g-vidal opened this issue Mar 24, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

incorporating DAISY/schema.org accessibility information #278

g-vidal opened this issue Mar 24, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@g-vidal
Copy link

g-vidal commented Mar 24, 2023

This issue may have also its place in docbook rather than in xslTNG only but I prefer to start from the goal as various strategies are probably possible to reach the goal.

Our target is to obtain an e-pub3 populated with accessibility metadata described on this page at Daisy.org using vocabularies and structures from CreativeWork at schema.org. Ongoing work is located on github w3c/a11y-discov-vocab.

Here is a short example (of package.opf ?) extracted from Daisy.

<metadata>
  <meta property="schema:accessibilitySummary">
     This publication conforms to WCAG 2.0 Level AA.
  </meta>
  <meta property="schema:accessMode">textual</meta>
  <meta property="schema:accessMode">visual</meta>
  <meta property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual</meta>
  <meta property="schema:accessibilityFeature">structuralNavigation</meta>
  <meta property="schema:accessibilityHazard">noFlashingHazard</meta>
  …
</metadata>

First of all my feeling is that we need to have in the schema a namespace for the subpart of schema.org used for accessibility. . Using schema as namespace as suggested by Daisy looks like a bad practice (?). My proposal should be to use a11y =accessibility as quoted in our example, because we just need the subpart of schema.org and will prevent messing up with other schema.org entities

<?xml-model href="http://docbook.org/xml/5.2/rng/docbook.rng" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?><?xml-model href="http://docbook.org/xml/5.2/rng/docbook.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>
<book xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" xmlns:a11y="https://schema.org/CreativeWork"
   xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" version="5.2" xml:lang="fr">
   <info>
      <title>Livre Minimal</title>
      <subtitle>Modèle DocBook 5.2 avec accessibilité</subtitle>
.../...
      <meta property="a11y:accessMode">textual</meta>
      <meta property="a11y:accessibilitySummary">This publication meets the requirements of WCAG 2.0
         AA partially WCAG 2.0 A and e-pub accessibility</meta>
      <meta property="a11y:accessModeSufficient">textual</meta>
   </info>
.../...

As soon as the attribute and vocabularies are available the XSL should detect this family of meta tags and treat them properly. It seems that such <meta> tag has to appear in package.opf and probably all xhtml files to specify the values given for each part/chapter depending on its content (audio, video, images,...). The proposed structure above is just a proposal inspired fromDaisy.

@ndw
Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Mar 24, 2023

That seems plausible. Might need a parameter to identify which namespace(s) you want copied from the source into the HTML/EPUB.

@g-vidal
Copy link
Author

g-vidal commented Mar 25, 2023

xmlns:a11y="https://schema.org/CreativeWork" might be introduced in DocBook schema to introduce the in the xml the <meta> with the vocabulary from scheme than teh namespace should be copied by default.

OOOOOPS !
This is amistake , ACE epub3 validator checks that the attributes have the form schema:accessMode then for epub transformation we need to produce <meta> tags with schema shhortcut for "https://schema.org/CreativeWork" namespace.

@ndw
Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Mar 26, 2023

Surely that's broken behavior on that validator. The whole point of the indirection mechanism is to decouple the prefix used in the short name from the URI.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants