Meeting minutes
Review HTML community survey
<Susan Neuhaus> The HTML Survey https://
Susan Neuhaus: hope everyone had a chance to review the proposed survey. Here is the link again.
@ivan I added points one hour ago. A paragraphe to clarify for the community, the difference between epub2 xhtml1.1 and epub3 xhtml serialisation of html.
Brady Duga: i think we should use xhtml syntax instead of serialisation. It's minor but important. We need to be clear and avoid confusion. We already support html, it's the new syntax we are supporting now.
Gautier Chomel: we have to use fewer open questions or control who we send the survey to
…we should chose if we want to question technical teams and make the questions more focused
…I would choose the technical part
Brady Duga: the question is how do we distribute this survey. With modern tools we can do contextualised questions.
Ivan Herman: i would prefer it not to become a big project. contextualising would need more thought and work on logics.
Ivan Herman: the whole question is of interest and importance for technical people only. Those who produce complex epub, tools, checkers, reading systems. Target is technical people only
Matt Garrish: I would prefer not to limit the audience or the timeframe.
Gautier Chomel: the time spent to make the survey and analyze the data collected, might be better
… to make it simple
… we don't need too many people to respond
… better to be sure the right people get access to the survey
… we could each send the survey to people we know
Charles LaPierre: I would not differentiate workflow / ingestion. It's a duplication.
Matt Garrish: section 1 is suffitient to get respondent context, i agree there is no need to complex context mechanism
Charles LaPierre: we want to know if HTML will be used, being for creation or ingestion, and in which timeframe. It's the same question for creation workflow and ingetsion workflow.
Ivan Herman: I see the point, section 1 and 2 are about who is the respondent, the real question is only in section 3.
Susan Neuhaus: i also have questions about how we'll deal with the collected data and communicate about it.
Gautier Chomel: I think we should use a github issue for the tech people
we don't need to collect a lot of responses
<Brady Duga> +1 to ivan and Gautier Chomel
Ivan Herman: we have one simple question: what happens if we accept html syntax? Which issue will appear? Then yes, Issue tracker is probably a better tool than a survey. We don't need details, only raising the potential issues.
Charles LaPierre: agree with simple large question.
<Charles LaPierre> example for the question: "How strongly to you agree/disagree with the addition of HTML Syntax addition: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree."
Matt Garrish: also to ask, if you don't plan to implement, why? Instead of checkbox, we need to understand the why Yes or No.
Brady Duga: Interesting idea, a one quetsion survey because no one knows for today. Maybe we'll need a bigger and detailed survey later. Not sure github is a good place anyway, it could end up with endless phylosophical discussions. Email sounds more reasonable for now, so we can collect individual feedbacks without having comments on other people responses..
Charles LaPierre: thru benetech and GCA we have a mailing list. Daisy has different ones too. We can use them to send the survey.
Ivan Herman: Could someone put together those discussions and make a proposal? So we don't spend months on discussing details.
Avneesh Singh: i agree with one large question, but still a due form method seems better to me, being google or survey monkey. This way we make sure to have one only point of collect and share the results.
Shinya Takami: we need strong context if we don't want "no move" answers. We need to collect issues and ways to solve them.
Ivan Herman: we have wbs, a w3c form for surveys.
Gautier Chomel: I can make a proposal for the text part of the survey
Gautier Chomel: should I make the proposal text in github?
AveneeshSingh: Google docs can have accessibility issues
Task forces
digital comics
Shinya Takami: comics task force will meet in the next weeks. we are still discussing next steps with my co chair. I was waiting for some feedbacks from the publishing comunity.
a11y
<Avneesh Singh> See minutes: https://
Avneesh Singh: we started on may first. here are the minutes. we'll skip the 15th one and have the next 29th. We discussed new metadata and shall we make accessmodesufficient mandatory. We updated the related issues and are waiting for feedbacks on this.
AOB
Brady Duga: back to the survey text, is really the issue the right workflow? Shouldn't we make a file, a PR and comment / amend there?
Ivan Herman: yes, PR is the best way.
Ivan Herman: it's early, but we can start thinking about our face to face meeting in Kobe.
<Shinya Takami> Not spec repo but wg repo will be good for text: w3c/
Avneesh Singh: Kobe will conflict with daisy board. If we agree with a face to face, i would prefer in the first days of tpac. On monday or tuesday.