Markus: "Approve the minutes from April 4th. Any comments? "
<mgylling> Virtual F2F: day+time: May
25th 12-16 UTC
...: "Minutes approved. Before we move to Peter, let me remind everyone
that have not much more than a month for the virtual face-to-face May
25th. It will be held using our standard Webex setup with video for
those who have it."
Ivan: "Last time we talked about this, it was like: ' yea we have to decide it then we'll set up the webex' but I haven't set it up yet. Is it now cast in concrete?"
Markus: " Yes, it's in concrete."
Ivan: "I will set up the webex, but the access code will be different. We will also send out an email."
Markus: "The detailed agenda needs to be built. "
<pkra> hehe.
...: "12-16 UTC. May 25th"
?: "That may conflict with the epub working group meeting...?"
Tzviya: "It... does..."
Markus: "We could use that to our benefit!"
Dave: "THEY COULD JOIN US! ONE OF US, ONE OF US!"
<pkra> join us and together we can rule the galaxy as epub and dpub.
<lrosenth> @pkra - or not...
Markus: "We'll talk about it during the Bordeaux update. Well *explitive deleted*..."
<HeatherF> No time will be perfect.
Tzviya: "Could we push that one? The 24th?"
Dave: "I cannot do the 24th"
Leonard: "Neither can I"
Jean: "Are we talking about May 24th? Which is a tuesday."
<pkra> lrosenth the dark side is strong with these ones.
Markus: "My suggestion is as follows. epub
working group will deal with this issue. I say we stay with the 25th.
The epub working group can find another day OR JOIN US"
... "May 25, 12-16 UTC. It still remains"
...: "Status update from peter."
Peter: "We have launched! ..."
<tzviya> https://www.w3.org/community/mathonwebpages/
Peter: "Done... Just kidding... Ok, here's more: Ivan was kind enough to fill out the questionaire for a TPAC slot. We reached out to a number of people who work on projects we are thinking about. The responses have been overwhelmingly positive. Most people have voiced interest in joining, some have joined, and some are coming. We have 18 participants even though we have done little to announce the group. We have a personal call-to-action..."
<pkra> https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0188/
...: "I hope we can circulate that a little as well to get more and more
people to join. The participants are an interesting mix, usually people
you don't see in these discussions. First goal is to find common ground
and get people together to find things they are interested in working
on. We hope to educate the appropriate people and be a positive role
within the W3C."
... "It will be lots of grassroots work and educate people on the
workings of the W3C so we can get things done. From the conversations
it's clear that everyone wants to give it a shot."
... "First thing we want to do is organize a get-together that goes
beyond email. By TPAC we hope to have had a few conversations. From my
side, a first obvious topic, are things related to ARIA and
accessibility. Not sure if people have found issues I had with a
specific document. It's a good point to enter the conversation and the
community group."
Markus: "One question I had, what is the relation between this community group and MathML?"
Peter: "On one hand it's the W3C's job to
determine what the MathML group will be doing with maintenance. I see
overlap. I would appreciate input for that, but this group is not going
to take on maintenance of MathML. But we are a different group."
...: "Neither encompasses the other..."
Markus: "How do you see the DPUB IG acting here?"
Peter: "Right, There is already an intersection - having people on both groups is a great start. Getting input and use-cases and expertise on specifics of digital publishing as well as the resources of a successful interest group will be valuable. Beyond that I cannot think of anything specific. For the ARIA work, I think there is a lot of places to work together. There are items that start with the ARIA that might want another group... It's too early to really say. There are other items."
Markus: "You now have ALL the luck."
Peter: "I don't mind recurring checkpoints."
<pkra> :)
Charles: "Peter, I'm already part of the group, thanks for starting it. One question I had: When do you expect the first meeting and how will you facilitate that? Poll?"
Peter: "I would like to do this as soon as possible. This month is a bit optimistic, but the initial thread will be short as we only have 18 people, so we should get a quick response from that initail email, then we can set something up in the next few weeks."
Peter: "In terms of technology, it depends on what requirements we have - do we need an accessible software or can we just use hangouts?"
Markus: "Before we move on, I saw a present plus on Hugh McGuire."
Hugh: "Hello, my name is Hugh McGuire and I've been working in web and books for a while, most recently on Pressbooks that does epub, mobi, web, and print. Recently focused on new/parallel project around open textbooks. Building open collaborative publishing platforms for scholarly works. Based in montreal, had a few discussions with Tzviya and Ivan. Happy to join and I'll be quiet and observe for now."
Markus: " What you'll notice is that we have a bunch of parallel threads, so you may want to join some of them, but take your time and browse."
Hugh: "My particular interest is around the PWP stuff I've seen."
Jean: "I'M BAAAAAACK"
<pkra> yay, jean!
Jean: "I'm here for 6 months? I'm independent."
Ivan: "Just a practical thing for Hugh. Your membership is still in the administration?"
Hugh: "After last week had a chat with Karen, and things are processed..."
Ivan: "Ok, so you're not on the mailing
list just yet, as you're not formally a member."
... "It's perfectly fine, but if we've sent an email, Hugh will not have
seen it. "
Markus: "Moving on. Epub summit update - a
bit more than a week ago, there was a 3-day meeting in Bordeaux, and I
won't run through each session, because it was video'd and you can watch
it."
... "First day was the epub working group, with 20 or so people. And Daniel
Glazman from CSS working group. I can think of 2 things worthy of
mention here - the first is, what we call Browser Friendly Format - BFF
- which has been a sub-stream of the working group. It's an attempt to
provide an alternate serialization that is not zipped but uses JSON
instead of XML. Apart from those differences, it's the same as an epub.
It's a server-side provision of the epub."
:: crickets chirp ::
Markus: " This has been driven by Hadrien
and Dave Cramer we did note during that meeting that we needed to have a
BFF meeting and the W3C people. There are overlapping concerns. We have
similar concerns - and an open discussion would be good to make sure we
don't fragment or mix things up by providing different solutions to
similar problems."
...: "We could have this discussion at our Face-to-face, but it would be
scope creep. It will be run on a separate timeline than 3.1"
Leonard: "I think that continuing our alignment and co-ordination is a good thing. I just want to make sure that we don't drop our effort/requirement in favor of theirs, as we've seen as we dive through our use cases, we continue to have requirements that are a super-set of theirs. we should be careful about how we go forward with this and not lose anything in the process."
Markus: "Yes, BFF has a limited scope and
may not always meet the other requirements. It's meant to be an
alternate to it's other serialization."
...: "Stemming from how the ebook ecosystem has evolved over the last 15
years, predicting style/layout is very difficult, because instead of
having author/user CSS, you have a middleman which is the reading
system, which can make substantial modifications to the authors CSS
without the user asking for it. Styling and layout in ebooks is a
negotiation between three parties. We're looking at ways to start
addressing this problem - it's a problem because it's costly for
authors, because it's costly to make ebooks look OK on so many
platforms."
...: "This is also an issue that has effect on PWP discussions - who is contributing to styling and layout. Who is in charge? Who wins/takes precedence? Dave? Any input?"
Dave: "As usual, your summary was brilliant. Agreed, this is a large problem that has many aspects and will take a long time to come to grips with. Baby steps as we're saying."
Markus: "Anything else from the
face-to-face? "
...: "Ok, moving on. YEAH! Two days of epub summit - you can watch the
whole video. Samual Petit he's working for Actialuna, he had a fantastic
presentation about user interaction and publisher requirements for
comics, manga, and in general every visual type publications like
children's book or educational publications. We're going to try to
involve Sam for work in that area. Comics/picture books that we don't
quite have yet."
<clapierre> maybe some a11y needs for comics?? would be great to get some use cases for that.
Ivan: "Many things that we talked about are not only for comics. It's for textbooks, and the ball is in his camp to apply for an invited expertise spot."
Markus: "What else to summarize. Do we want to talk about the FEATURE THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED?"
Bill: "I wanted to re-inforce that people
may not want to do 2 days worth of video, but that specific one was
worth doing as it was very visual. There are a number of textbook
publishers would also like what they want. Micah Bowers was a great one
on mobile - he's from BlueFire."
...: "Not to get you off the hook on THE ACRONYM THAT WE DO NOT SPEAK
OF. The LCP is a readium initiative that may be interested by the W3C."
Bill: "Stands for Lightweight Content Protection."
Dave: "I think it's 'licensed content protection' because it's not lightweight anymore'
Ivan: "One - of course Markus and I couldn't hold our mouths and we had our presentations, too. We got quite a lot of feedback on the PWP format work. All of them, at a minimum, were very interested. The other thing is more about future - in a sense that the guys who organize that did a brilliant job to organize it in a short time. Now there are discussions going on whether this is a one-time event or if it would be a regular event. If it would be in Bordeaux, etc..."
Markus: "Next up - LatinReq updates."
Dave: "This is related to Bordeaux. The only reason to go to conferences and summits is to talk between presentations. I was chatting with a woman from spain who was talking about details of quotations and number formatting in spanish. that inspired me to add something about number format to LatinReq and flesh out the requirements for punctuation and quotation marks. I made a small update to
those as well. There's a thread about quotation marks and the use of CSS and the quotes tag..."
Markus: " This stuff is already up on GitHub?"
Dave: "Yes, I put up a few basics. it's interesting, especially with the numbering, as there is a lot of conflicting information on the web. There are culture specific things, not language specific, so it doesn't tie to language code specifically."
Markus: "Good."
<clapierre> http://w3c.github.io/dpub-accessibility/
<Jean_K> re a11y note - someone should go through and look for duplicated "the gap"... I found one upon opening the doc.
Charles: "Above is the URL to our note. The accessibility task force is close - George had a few comments over the weekend - we want to do a review of the note before we proceed to publish this to the W3C. Please give it a look and provide comments. If you do find issues, file them in issues in GitHub and we'll be happy to review them and make changes as necessary. We'll need Ivan's help on how we proceed to make it a formal W3c note. "
Deborah: "If there are big missing things, let us know, and we'll add them to the next major version - so we want to know about them."
<ivan> charles, do not worry about the formal side, it is not complicated
Markus: "You're requesting review from the
IG. Lets give the IG a deadline. It'll speed up their review."
...: "Monday? Or a longer review time?"
Charles: "It's not very long a week should be fine. Ok - EVERYONE, read the note and comment if you have them. We'll return to the comments next week."
<clapierre> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-accessibility
Ivan: "yes, we need a consensus, which we could do next monday."
Charles: "I posted the main document above."
Ivan: "And you'd prefer github issues?"
<Jean_K> I vote aye for Monday, and may border collie people by email throughout the week to go to the link if I remember...
Charles: "Yes please"
Markus: " Ok, part of next week's agenda then. Tzviya? Miss anything?"
Markus: "I believe both Romain and Heather are here so lets catch up with where we were."
<HeatherF> https://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/UseCase_Template
Heather: "When last we left our humble
explorers, many people said they would submit use cases."
... "I am trying to put together a document that follows the CSV
use-case model. I've been starting on that but I'm working on the
technical details of using re-spec and getting all the use-cases."
<lrosenth> hides head in shame...
Markus: "How can we help you get the use-cases?"
<hughmcguire> yes
<pkra> me too.
<HeatherF> very, very consistent. And very, very annoying.
<hughmcguire> feature not bug i bet
Ivan: "Will you take over getting the use-cases for the PWP-document? One of the things I want to take on is to begin to work on the PWP things and the locators, etc. Everything that is in the use-case sections should move to you. Will you take care of that?"
Heather: "Yes, I'll take care of that."
Ivan: "I can offer some advice if you need help."
<hughmcguire> i’m interested in contributing to PWP use cases
Markus: "Who needs an arm twisted?"
Heather: "I know we were going to talk about packaging. Accessibility and indentifiers use-case."
<bjdmeest> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/issues/19
<rdeltour> side note: I was mostly offline for the past 2 weeks, but now back in EU, my arm is ready to be twisted to assist with the editing and porting existing UCs from different groups
Ben: "I wanted to say that I also added some use-cases, possibly in the wrong format - I'll fetch the link somewhere. I can try to put them in the right format. I made an issue but it's more a list of scenarios that we came across."
<tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/wiki/Use-Cases-Overview
Tzviya: "I noted some of the use cases and the names who volunteered."
Here's my use-case that I think I put in the wrong place: https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Use_Cases/State_Changing_Document
Heather: "Our next call is later this week, so we can discuss it then. When I'm not traveling, I'm on those calls..."
Leonard: "We have an archiving meeting thursday and can discuss then."
Romain: "I was mostly offline the last 2 weeks. Quick Question: In main PWP document, is it section 3 about the areas of interest - are you talking about that?"
Ivan: "yes"
... "One guy in the audience, who was very interested and commented,
I've had discussions with him on locators. He may have some use-cases as
he was referring to work he's been on. Should we reach out to him and
have him contact heather?"
Heather: "Of course."
Tzviya: " We can get lots of use-cases from people we met with last week."
Romain: "Should we wait for the draft before asking?"
Ivan: "My initial sense is that I would reach out when there is already something to show - saying 'these are the things we're looking for"
Romain: "There might be too much overlap with what we really have..."
Ivan: " I would prefer to do that."
Nick: "We can also interview people to get
new use cases. But it's a lot of effort."
... "And I volunteer to talk to people"
karen: "we always welcome all these use cases. In a day or two, hopefully tomorrow, I'll be sending an advisory about Tim Berners-Lee's speech."
<HeatherF> thanks all
Markus: " Next week, the accessibility note, then consensus to move forward. As always - more work on the use cases work. And..... we're done...."