Needs more OPDS 2.0 authors and publishers section

[acuna-public]

Now OPDS 2.0 publication (https://drafts.opds.io/opds-2.0#41-opds-publication) supports only one author and publisher, but of course some books have more than one of it, please add it to draft.

And what about acquisition links (https://drafts.opds.io/opds-2.0#43-acquisition-links), where I can add it, is it at the links section?

[cortopy]

Exactly my thoughts and I would add this goes beyond authors, and should include any field that links to a person/company. Some examples:

• authors
• translators
• editors
• collaborators
• illustrators
  etc.

[acuna-public]

@cortopy seems that this draft is abandoned by @HadrienGardeur, so I'm planning to fork it and edit it by my own, so I'll wait some days and seems I need to do it

[cortopy]

does that mean the project has been abandoned altogether?

[HadrienGardeur]

No that's not the case. OPDS 2.0 is not abandoned at all.

As for the contributors, we align this strictly with RWPM so these contributor types are already supported:

• documentation: https://readium.org/webpub-manifest/contexts/default/#contributors
• schema: https://github.com/readium/webpub-manifest/blob/master/schema/metadata.schema.json#L81-L119

The documentation illustrates how things are handled:

• these contributor elements allow the following options: a single string, single object, multiple strings or multiple objects
• the object itself allows for optional elements such as sortAs, identifier, role and links

As it is, this is already much more powerful than what was previously available in OPDS 1.x.

[acuna-public]

@HadrienGardeur I mean it's abandoned in that case that I didn't receive the answers until other users joined this conversations, sorry. And thanks for documentation, it's exactly what we need, seems it can be added to the readme, because current documentation doesn't handle all its capabilities.

[HadrienGardeur]

It's a community effort in the sense that everyone is free to chime in as well.
For your first comment, it was posted in August when multiple stakeholders were on holidays, which is why it flew under our radar.
I provided a reply as soon as it came back up in my notifications a few days ago.

For the documentation, I'd rather avoid duplicating what's already in RWPM as it would make things difficult to sync up between both specifications. We'll schedule regular calls once again in 2021 to discuss the OPDS 2.0 draft and I expect this to be a topic of discussion.

For now, I highly recommend looking at the JSON Schema in addition to the draft as it covers all these elements and can be used to validate their usage as well.