Digital Publishing Interest Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2014

<scribe> scribenick: dauwhe

mgylling: let's get going

we will devote this call to metadata

<tzviya> zakim who is here?

mgylling: we'll go through your actions and talk about them
... we asked offline about figuring out what BISG is doing in this area
... so we asked Julie and Phil to be ready to outline what BISG is doing with metadata
... we don't want to duplicate effort or create confusion
... we need to approve last week's minutes

Minutes approved.

mgylling: let's start with metadata rather than administrivia
... OK to start with Phil/Julie?

Bill_Kasdorf: let me start with task force
... 3 assignments from tpac
... First, investigate identifiers as URIs
... Second, educate people on RDF
... Third, update documentation we've compiled and turn into w3c note
... I'm now focused on this
... we have highly qualified volunteers
... what should we call them?

mgylling: they are deliverables

Bill_Kasdorf: If anyone else wants to participate, please volunteer
... lots of suggestions for RDF educational resources
... on IDs in URIs, I think issue is
... lots of IDs can and should be expressed as URIs to be actionable
... some of the organizations do suggest this (like CrossRef)
... assemble a list of IDs
... see if governing organization suggests they be expressed as URI

<david_stroup> I'm 585.217

Bill_Kasdorf: for example, ISBN *can* be expressed as URI but is uncommon
... what documentation/recommendations there are
... then compile report
... so we can see where to go from here
... RDF is similar
... we have volunteers
... we just have to compile list of links to references
... some targets libraries, some publishers, etc
... some are geeky and some are clear, plain language
... we need a gap analysis
... there's lots out there
... but publishers don't understand
... and lots of systems don't use RDF
... report by mid-December
... Madi, do you have anything to add?

madi: we can run with this
... we also need explanation of why we need these reports
... why URI? Why RDF?

Bill_Kasdorf: [listing volunteers]

<Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to ask about "actionable"

mgylling: we have a queue

azaroth: the use of actionable uri and is that a requirement?
... there are URI identifiers that are *not* actionable

Bill_Kasdorf: thanks
... one reason to express as URI is to make it actionable
... but they are not necessarily actionable

mgylling: OK
... open up for QA later, but let's ask about BISG

Julie: I'll start
... the metadata committee focuses mostly on product metadata and ONIX
... one WG focuses on transition to ONIX3 in the U.S.
... one will map part of ONIX to schema.org
... a third will look at educational standards to build a keyword taxonomy
... this is not content level but product level, all tied to onix
... the Identification Committee will be more relevant here, Phil is the chair
... there's interest in a work identifier

philm: Re: metadata committee
... this committee will have something to do with RDF
... esp. if Graham is interested in an RDF version of ONIX
... the committee has been only concerned with ONIX for years now
... these groups have been involved within the book supply change
... it was an isolated supply chain
... that's changing
... we need to look outside that supply chain
... even books are sold at Target and Wall-mart now
... these are handled by independent distributors
... they handle the stocking and resupply, so we don't get involved
... GS1 standard, for example...
... we have lots of conflicts with larger world
... we use things in non-standard ways
... in ID committee, when we talk about work identifier
... we want to get use cases
... and to think outside the industry
... we've been talking about work identifier for a decade
... ISTC has not gained traction
... we've failed to define what a work identifier should be
... as different sectors have different ideas
... every possible manifiestation regardless of format?
... even across publishers or nations?
... authors and agents like that.
... publishers and retailers don't like it
... they want a collection identifier, to group together manifestations
... Moby-Dick. There are thousands of editions
... there's text, popup books, coloring books
... should all the manifestations show up in search?
... retailers want to control that
... to get relevant results
... publishers want to collect all their manifestations, but not others
... for Twilight, we had print rights but Random House had audio rights
... so that's how these discussions go
... we fail to come to consensus
... no one has come up with a problem so urgent that the work identifier is the solution
... we've sorted this out, organization by organization
... can link ISBNs together with related field
... but haven't looked from a perspective beyond ONIX
... ISBN is being revised now
... there is now a section on ISBN-A, which is an actionable ISBN
... it will be in the user manual
... not sure when that will be published
... within the publishing industry, there are various sectors
... who have different ideas of what a work identifier should do
... pick one sector that has a really good use case
... that shows the value, then other sectors will follow
... that hasn't happened yet
... same thing with RDF
... it's been hard even to upgrade from ONIX 2 to ONIX 3
... four or five years after ONIX 3 was published
... publishers are not technology companies
... takes a really good use case to get us to do these things
... if the system works, like ONIX, the bar is very high
... "how will this get more books out there, connect with the reader"
... perhaps Social media or author pages will provide a use case
... even to get other publishers to join W3C
... have to connect with business case

tzviya: sounds like there are a few things that BISG does
... educating publishers about what exists
... and an effort to create a uniformity in the way of things are being done, like a work ID

Julie: yes.
... most of our work is a cycle of identifying pain points
... doing research and creating standards
... also with documents and events

Bill_Kasdorf: Could you mention the subject codes committee
... people might not understand difference between BISAC and ONIX
... BISAC is subject classifications
... and we work on Thema
... both of those are data points within ONIX
... those are two examples of not just educating but being responsible for the standards

Karen: Phil, you mentioned adoption of ONIX 3 is slow. Is that just US?

philm: ONIX 3 is strong in new markets

<laudrain> +q

philm: slower in UK, France is quicker than US
... globally, we haven't been asked for ONIX3 internationally

Bill_Kasdorf: I always thought it was publishers dragging their feet due to their existing systems
... but Phil pointed out that the problem is the retailers and recipients requiring ONIX 2
... [insert chicken/egg metaphor]

philm: Yes. Publishers are very reactive.
... we react to what our customers want from us, as any supplier does
... we have limited resources
... if the recipients say we will require this in six months, we'd do it
... but without knowing that it's hard to schedule
... if no one's gonna take it, why send it?

Bill_Kasdorf: it's better

Julie: we want to create a grid of up and downstream support

<Karen> +1 grid of ONIX 3

philm: we've been able to create oNIX 3 for a year
... just started sending it out last week
... transparency will help

laudrain: in France ONIX 3 position is much better
... been pushing for several months, several retailers accepting it
... 50% in France using ONIX 3

mgylling: let's focus on what IG can do

tzviya: that's what I was going to say

mgylling: what are your views in terms of W3C and this IG's involvement moving forward
... is there any low-hanging topics that would be ideal for W3C to focus on?

philm: I think what the publishing industry needs clarity on what these things are and how to incorporate into web page
... if that's the recommendation on how to embed metadata into a web page, that's what they're looking for
... so if W3C is saying this, it helps for publishers to say we have a working framework

Julie: I agree
... what would help is greater education about web technologies
... the work that Bill is talking about, gathering RDF resources
... we can raise that as topic in BISG metadata committee
... an easy way to start a conversation
... and see if there are next steps

philm: If we can get use cases from outside the publishing industry where this works
... it will help
... if we see something working somewhere else, that will really help

Bill_Kasdorf: I was going to say the same thing
... RDF is widely understood and used in libraries
... IPTC is major proponent of RDF
... [insert chicken-and-egg metaphor]

TimCole: I'd say library communitiy is just starting with RDF
... W3C can't tell publishing community that this is the right standard for this identifier
... there won't be a single canonical ID
... there will be lots of smaller IDs that need to be connected
... RDF can do this connection

<Karen> +1 Tim's clarification on RDF value

TimCole: shared identifiers
... in a few weeks we'll talk about reconciliation services between identifiers
... someone has to connect publisher ID and retailer ID

Bill_Kasdorf: identifiers embedded in identifiers
... an ISBN-A is an ISBN with a DOI in it expressed as a URI, so in fact it's all three

tzviya: We're going in circles
... let's take a step back
... it would be beneficial for the publishing community to learn about how linked data can be helpful (like BBC)
... or tell people to read books about linked data
... how can BISG and DPUB work together without stepping on feet
... BISG is US-centric, W3C is international

Julie: We are U.S. focused and U.S. based
... but not exclusive
... we're focused on global standards but serving the US market
... can we take another look at action items and make sure they're on track
... and aligned with what the larger publishing world is trying to accomplist
... based on what phil says, releasing a guide on RDF won't have much traction
... but maybe we want to talk about examples in the wider world where this is used

Bill_Kasdorf: our action items were intended to be preparatory for that
... the whole point of that work item was to see what's out there and point people to it

tzviya: there was another action to develope list of IDs to express as URIs

Bill_Kasdorf: the point of that work item was to find the gaps
... at TPAC someone pointed out an org that had misleading guidance about using an identifier as URI
... the point was to give a sense of the issue
... the gap between recommendation and practice
... it wasn't a master resource
... BISG has that
... I see them as assessing the landscape, not publishing a product
... to what extent is there understanding or use of (RDF | ID as URI)
... but we do need concrete examples and use cases

mgylling: there are publishers that are using RDF, like inkling and benetech

Bill_Kasdorf: pointing to a realistic thing like that is good

mgylling: you're agreeing with Julie and Phil's suggestions on end product
... and your current actions are steps on the way there

Bill_Kasdorf: yes

mgylling: OK

tzviya: it does make sense to survey the landscape
... I'm concerned we're asking a lot of a small group of people to survey the landscape

Bill_Kasdorf: how much does this have to be comprehensive vs illustrative
... neither of this things would result in a publishable product

mgylling: which digital publishers are already doing this? what are their problems/benefits?
... primarily RDF
... the basic charter imperatives is that we're supposed to identify areas where OWP needs to change
... I'm not seeing that here
... this is about information and about changing how business is done

Bill_Kasdorf: true

mgylling: any other questions

Bill_Kasdorf: Karen?

Karen: yes, we covered my Q about international focus and deliverables

mgylling: I agree with Tzviya's points, we should incorporate a certain amount of worry about time
... we don't want to become yet another organization caught in the maelstrom

Bill_Kasdorf: we have only weeks before our first action items are due

mgylling: two minutes left, so we have to cut this off
... the only agenda item we didn't get to was next week's call
... may not be a good idea due to the U.S. Thanksgiving Holiday

<Karen> I'll be working

<azaroth> Regrets for the next three weeks running (thx giving, reconciliation meeting, CNI conference)

dauwhe: can talk about CSS stuff next week

<pkra> sorry, gotta run.

mgylling: can look at Page DOM too, if Brady is around
... thanks everyone

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/compliled/compiled/
Succeeded: s/organazation/organization/
Succeeded: s/popub/popup/
Succeeded: s/taht/that/
Found ScribeNick: dauwhe
Inferring Scribes: dauwhe

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Present: Ben_De_Meester

WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list!


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 17 Nov 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-dpub-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report