Publishing Business Group Telco — Minutes

Date: 2018-02-27

See also the Agenda and the IRC Log

Attendees

Present: Junko Kamata, Dave Cramer, Ric Wright, Avneesh Singh, Luc Audrain, Wolfgang Schindler, Liisa McCloy-Kelley, Rachel Comerford, Tzviya Siegman, Ivan Herman, Garth Conboy, George Kerscher, Mateus Teixeira, Bill Kasdorf, Bill McCoy, Cristina Mussinelli, Paul Belfanti, Dan Sanicola, Laurent Le Meurs, Brian O’Leary, Julian Calderazi

Regrets: Ivan Herman, Jens Klingelhöfer, Virginie Clayssen

Guests:

Chair: Liisa McCloy-Kelley

Scribe(s): Ric Wright

Content:

1. EPUB roadmap task force

Luc Audrain: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r2RbLipc5VY3vUp_iuPak3oaNxI5BF9gJ5s-98qsmEY/edit#heading=h.izdc9lnn3tf

Luc Audrain: working on the EPUB 3.2 proposal
… general idea is to describe the “state” of EPUB. What the CG needs from the BG is a consensus about the direction EPUB should go
… some discussion of the version number, but there seems to be a consensus around 3.2
… the ask from the TF to the BG is what are the requirements. The main item is to bring back compatibility between 3.0.1 and 3.2
… The TF is aware that there are little or no 3.1 EPUBs because of the lack of support by EPUBCheck and the compatibility issues
… the TF would like to have the BG provide feedback and approval of the proposals generated by the TF
… If the proposal is accepted then the appropriate technical resources would then write the actual 3.2 specification
… It is proposed that the group take 2 weeks to consider these proposals

Ivan Herman: Clarification: is it expected that 3.2 will formally supersede 3.1 and make 3.1 obsolete?

Garth Conboy: Yes!

Ivan Herman: Then this point should be made very explicit in the document

Garth Conboy: The proposal does say “3.1 will be withdrawn”

Luc Audrain: 3.2 will be published as a “note” rather than a recommendation

George Kerscher: 3.2 will be a specification though in W3C terminology will be a Note
… The EPUB A11y specification will also be updated?

Garth Conboy: From proposal: “Retain EPUB 3.1 Accessibility Support language roughly as is for EPUB 3.2 (though, some of the A11Y specs may need to be slightly altered to reflect this).”

George Kerscher: Even though the a11y spec was intended to be independent, it still should be reviewed.

Bill McCoy: This will be the first time we have done this so we should try to put our (BG) imprimatur on this “Note”, noting that it will be approved by the BG
… and that the spec will be submitted to ISO.

Ivan Herman: It does not need to be decided right now, but once the CG has finalized the spec, we can think of putting it to
… a short-lived W3C WG which could then turn it into a real W3C recommendation
… This is not an unprecedented approach
… By the time this is all done, the TPI program should have expired

Luc Audrain: The TF imagined that once the CG had finished its work, it would make a proposal to the BG that the spec should become a more official proposal

Dave Cramer: Good that 3.2 should move to a WG but the role of the CG should not be minimized

Bill Kasdorf: I have been involved in similar efforts where the CG promulgated a spec. But if we submit the spec to ISO then later changed it in a WG that could be bad

Ivan Herman: It is true that this is a risk, but if 3.2 is significantly enhanced by the WG, then that is a risk that is worth taking
… JSON-LD 1.1 is an example of this process. The CG did a very careful job which minimized that risk
… I am more concerned about the timelines of the various groups involved (WG, BG)

Luc Audrain: Would like to note that the TF did discuss the role of marketing a 3.2 spec such that it is accepted
… TF also hopes that epubcheck will be ready for 3.2 :-)
… Also providing publishing testimonials and other supporting materials
… hopefully there will be discussion of 3.2 at the EDRLab summit in Berlin in May and TPAC at Lyons this year

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Do we need a TF specifically for the marketing?

Luc Audrain: Yes.

Garth Conboy: Before we leave this topic, should we have a resolution about what we want the BG members to review and approve in 2 weeks?

Paul Belfanti: Must drop - apologies - will catch up via meeting notes

Tzviya Siegman: While we don’t have any real marketers in this group we should have some resources of that ilk

Brian O’Leary: Brian sees himself as a marketer :)

George Kerscher: ACE will be ready in time for 3.2

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: +1+1 to proposal

Proposed resolution: “The BG should consider the proposal by the CG and express its approval, telling the CG to go ahead” (Luc Audrain)

Garth Conboy: +1

Tzviya Siegman: +1

Bill Kasdorf: +1

Avneesh Singh: Idea to timeline for 3.2?

Dave Cramer: No, we do not have a good timeline at this point. It’s complex. Not years anyway

Tzviya Siegman: we also need to allot more time for testing than we have in the past bc of the w3c testing process

Garth Conboy: (Full of happy pills) We would like to have something to socialize by Berlin in May

Laurent Le Meurs: +1

Ric Wright: +1

Resolution #1: “The BG should consider the proposal by the CG and express its approval, telling the CG to go ahead”

2. funding for epubcheck maintenance

Ric Wright: EPUBCheck funding

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Do we have any hard numbers for cost?

Tzviya Siegman: No, we have estimated times but not costs

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Is the ask going to come from W3C/Ingram or more directly from the (BG) group?

George Kerscher: I think it would be proper for the BG should making the ask

Laurent Le Meurs: +1 with George

3. documentation, sites for the BG

Ivan Herman: I have set up a page for this

Ivan Herman: https://w3c.github.io/publ-bg/

Ivan Herman: This is a adaptation of a page that the DPUB WG uses for this purpose
… it is github-based so it is easy to manage and use (for the github-savvy)
… will try to post the minutes and whatever other information people would like to be put there
… it is not the page the official home page of the BG; there is no authorization to redirect the official home page here
… Instead it is a form of “working page”

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: https://www.w3.org/wiki/PublishingBG/Main_Page

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: The above link will be updated to indicate that it is now superseded by the new page

Ivan Herman: There is also a google doc folder for those who prefer a google doc; the link is added to the pages to find it more easily.

Ivan Herman: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1tQf56giFynYlWKm5DmrxTUbYUwpzQAmI

Tzviya Siegman: works for me

Brian O’Leary: works for me, as well

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Is this acceptable? (General silence indicates acceptance)

Luc Audrain: works for me

4. Need for gathering information for EPUB Requirements

Luc Audrain: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsd6-d2gac5QFHw7lM927hjRV1CEh_80qcaTO3ddBbE/edit?usp=drive_web&ouid=108889320625913668754

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: This is just a starting point. If there is missing information, please start adding it

5. DPUB SUmmit

Laurent Le Meurs: Note that the summit is coming up. Would the BG be amenable to posting info about the Summit in the BG working page?

Luc Audrain: +1

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: +1

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Any reason that we wouldn’t or couldn’t do this?

Garth Conboy: +1

Ivan Herman: +1

Brian O’Leary: +1

Wolfgang Schindler: +1

Bill Kasdorf: +1

Ivan Herman: Seems OK to me.

Rachel Comerford: +1

Garth Conboy: Seems like a service to the members and therefore appropriate

Bill Kasdorf: Would there be a discount for W3C members?

Laurent Le Meurs: Yes, but no code required

Brian O’Leary: BillK and I started a a new newsletter this week and we would be happy to include info about the summit

Brian O’Leary: We didn’t quite start the newsletter :)

Bill Kasdorf: correction: Brian started the BISG newsletter, I was just discussing it with him.

Brian O’Leary: Bill and I were talking about using it :)

Tzviya Siegman: Are comments about the Requirements welcome?

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Yes, please

6. Misc

Laurent Le Meurs: for those who’d like more info on the DPUB Summit Europe: https://www.edrlab.org/dpub-summit-2018/

George Kerscher: Disposition of the old IDPF A11y site? WHat is the status of that?

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: It is in process

George Kerscher: Then it is will be on the next meeting’s agenda?

Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Yes

7. Resolutions