See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 15 December 2014
<ivan> Scribe: Luc
Dave, is it your dog?
<ivan> scribenick: laudrain
<Karen> +1 Luc for scribing
<tzviya> http://www.w3.org/2014/12/08-dpub-minutes.html
Last minutes : no comments
Last minutes approved!
Update form Peter on STEM cast
<david_stroup> 585.217
Main update : link on the agenda
<tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-stem/wiki/questionnaire#less-rough-questions
Ready to turn to a W3C
But, discussion on question of semantics
Quick walkthrough
Preflight check : STEM specific or OWP specific
gather background on person filling the questionnaire
section on content, content types, additional wor k for the web
back-end vs front-end, archieval needs
HTML version on the web vs PDF
Why they differ
section on authoring, formats, tools for authoring, Web reading, Web techno and workflow, accessiblility
How should we respond?
Comments to Peter
by email or the wiki
MathMl part of it : Benetech on MathML cloud
provide accessible content form that content
Benetech implementing in the next year
Peter: problem what kind math will be used,
consensus on chemML?
there might be solutions that work as a service
tzviya: which formats are in use?
But no suggestion, discovery process
Ivan: how will this work? It’s huge
Answering all individual question?
Many questions, too big
tzviya: everything is combined : markup, browser, HTML, CSS
big job distinguishing where to direct the info
Peter: people are generally interested in working on part of it
Like CSS, people might only answer the right section
So no restriction so far
Ivan: practical comment : W3C tool has the option to add a comment box to each question
Bill_Kasdorf: reaction it is huge, but all that detail help people think to take things separately
Ivan: how we should do that in practice?
Big section workflow, sub section with 5 bullets : how to put that in a questionnaire?
How do you envisage the format of the questionnaire?
Peter: questionnaire as a email interview
Ivan: we will have to make sense from the answers
imagine one question, plus bullets multiple questions, plus text box
all text boxes will make a huge job to make sense
Bill: we should ask suggestion on technology
Tzviya: next steps
what is the time line?plan in November
not before January first
Peter: transfer a particular section or question to the TF before Christmas
On the TF: Liam, Ivan
tzviya: should arrange a meeting with the TF
<Bill_Kasdorf> I'm on the STEM TF too
<Bill_Kasdorf> Also Tim Cole
Ivan: ask for help to do the questionnaire using the WBS form from Ivan or Thierry
<Karen> +1 next version of survey in WBS questionnaire format
<tzviya> +1
<ivan> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/99999/DPUBSTEM/
be careful about to have in a way the public can come in
it is doable, perhaps with a new one
<Karen> +1 pre-test 'guinea pigs'
Tzviya: end of the month, draft of the
survey, sent out early january to guinea pigs
... edit actions items
<tzviya> http://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/track/
Next point: tracker housekeeping
21 open actions, 17 overdue
<ivan> open actions: http://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/track/actions/open
go through action list
<ivan> CLOSE action-19
<trackbot> Closed action-19.
<tzviya> close action-20
<trackbot> Closed action-20.
<scribe> ACTION 21 to make it in 2 actions, survey end of february [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-dpub-minutes.html#action03]
<scribe> ACTION: 22 to add or close? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-dpub-minutes.html#action04]
ok to close action 22
<tzviya> close action-22
<trackbot> Closed action-22.
<scribe> ACTION: 23 to close [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-dpub-minutes.html#action05]
<tzviya> close action-23
<trackbot> Closed action-23.
<scribe> ACTION: 24 to be closed [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-dpub-minutes.html#action06]
<tzviya> close action-24
<trackbot> Closed action-24.
<tzviya> close action-25
<trackbot> Closed action-25.
<scribe> Closed action 25
<tzviya> close action-26
<trackbot> Closed action-26.
Peter: action 27 should be done sometimes
<tzviya> close action-28
<trackbot> Closed action-28.
Dave: spread behaviors finished
<tzviya> close action-29
<trackbot> Closed action-29.
From TPAC, initiate business use cases: Karen working on that
<tzviya> close action-32
<trackbot> Closed action-32.
<tzviya> close action-35
<trackbot> Closed action-35.
Best practice for rdfa: in progress
<tzviya> close action-41
<trackbot> Closed action-41.
Ivan: somebody from the publishing community should be driving, Liza did volunteer
More people form IDPF for action 43
Please keep issues up to date
Thierry: in DPUB IG charter there is a deliverable, an IG Note of a document listing W3C specifications that are important for the Digital Publishing industry but are still in an unstable state at the W3C, as well as their current state in the process.
<ivan> list is: http://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/W3C_specs_for_DPUB
Thierry:I started this effort about a year ago. It is currently in the wiki. We have discussed it before during a telecon, and IG participants have since enriched the document with W3C specs.
Thierry:do we think the list is complete and
should we publish it as a NOTE, as mentioned in the Charter?
A second option would be to keep it alive in the wiki and IG
participants could update it as needed.
Ivan: I have a third option. A NOTE will freeze it, so it is not a good option. If we keep it as is on the wiki, the document will be editable only by members of the group
Ivan: Prefer to put it in a more public area, public wiki, anyboby who has a public account can go and edit it
or put it on a github repo: prefer people would have the posibility to edit it
tzviya:agree that an IG NOTE
would freeze the document.
Thierry: Currently there are 2 sections in the document : stable techno W3C RECs (mainly used in EPUB3), and techno in dev
<pkra> +q
Peter: MathML and MathML2 on the list, how
do we manage the 2 versions ?
Thierry: if the question is which version is currently used in EPUB, a column on the right of the table specifies it.
Bill: « used in publishing » comment
<pkra> I wasn't thinking about epub actually.