IRC log of dpub on 2017-02-27

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:23:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dpub
16:23:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:23:09 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:23:09 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dpub
16:23:11 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be dpub
16:23:11 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
16:23:12 [trackbot]
Meeting: Digital Publishing Interest Group Teleconference
16:23:12 [trackbot]
Date: 27 February 2017
16:23:15 [ivan]
Chair: Garth
16:23:32 [ivan]
16:23:48 [ivan]
ivan has changed the topic to: agenda for 2017-02-27:
16:23:56 [ivan]
Regrets: Nick
16:47:42 [rdeltour]
rdeltour has joined #dpub
16:56:32 [Rick_Johnson]
Rick_Johnson has joined #dpub
16:56:40 [Rick_Johnson]
present+ RIck_Johnson
16:57:08 [leonardr]
leonardr has joined #dpub
16:57:27 [leonardr]
present+ Leonard
16:57:36 [Avneesh]
Avneesh has joined #dpub
16:58:05 [Avneesh]
present+ Avneesh
16:58:28 [ivan]
16:58:43 [HeatherF]
HeatherF has joined #dpub
16:59:16 [Vlad]
Vlad has joined #dpub
16:59:23 [BillMcCoy]
BillMcCoy has joined #dpub
16:59:51 [leonardr_]
leonardr_ has joined #dpub
17:00:01 [dauwhe]
present+ dauwhe
17:00:08 [Karen]
present+ Karen
17:00:10 [laudrain]
laudrain has joined #dpub
17:00:47 [laudrain]
17:01:02 [Garth]
Garth has joined #dpub
17:01:06 [cmaden2]
cmaden2 has joined #dpub
17:01:14 [rdeltour]
17:01:45 [Bill_Kasdorf]
Bill_Kasdorf has joined #dpub
17:01:58 [Bill_Kasdorf]
present+ Bill_Kasdorf
17:02:03 [cmaden2]
present+ Chris_Maden
17:02:22 [pkra]
pkra has joined #dpub
17:02:23 [clapierre1]
clapierre1 has joined #DPUB
17:02:37 [pkra]
present+ Peter Krautzberger
17:02:55 [Karen]
scribenick: Karen
17:02:57 [pkra]
*hides in the shadows*
17:03:01 [Vlad]
17:03:13 [clapierre]
clapierre has joined #DPUB
17:03:13 [Bert]
17:03:17 [Karen]
Garth: we look to have a critical mass
17:03:23 [astearns]
17:03:27 [Karen]
…Last Monday was a holiday in the states, so maybe that helped
17:03:31 [Karen]
…Minutes are in the agenda
17:03:35 [Karen]
…they looked ok to me
17:03:40 [Karen]
…any objections to minute approval?
17:03:41 [Garth]
17:03:51 [Karen]
…Silence being consent, let's note that they minutes are approved
17:04:03 [Karen]
…Looking at irc, I'll call out some of the new-comers we are expecting
17:04:16 [Karen]
…Jonathan Hevenstone from Atypon/Wiley membership
17:04:25 [Karen]
…hope he is here and will be contributing shortly
17:04:28 [dkaplan3]
present+ Deborah_Kaplan
17:04:29 [Karen]
…and Nick Brown from Ingram
17:04:35 [Karen]
Nick: yes, I am here
17:04:44 [Karen]
Garth: want to give us a brief introduction
17:04:56 [Karen]
Nick: I work with Ingram, specifically Vital Source
17:05:02 [Karen]
…work on our ereader applications
17:05:11 [Karen]
…we are huge proponents of EPUB
17:05:18 [Karen]
…work closely with Rick Johnson whom you know
17:05:23 [Karen]
Garth: welcome aboard
17:05:29 [Karen]
…And @ with Pearson
17:05:34 [Karen]
…she joined and sent regrets
17:05:50 [Karen]
Bill_Kasdorf: Quick comment on Jonathan
17:05:50 [Garth]
17:05:59 [Karen]
…his company Atypon was acquired by Wiley
17:06:04 [Karen]
Jonathan: I just joined
17:06:11 [Karen]
…is there a question about the involvement we will have?
17:06:24 [Karen]
Garth: you don't have to divulge secrets; just give us an introduction about you
17:06:35 [Karen]
Jonathan: I was involved in IDPF when we were developing the first EPUB spec
17:06:44 [Karen]
…working with Publishing Dementions, later acquired by Jouve
17:06:47 [nickbrown]
nickbrown has joined #dpub
17:06:53 [Karen]
…Atypon is a tech company acquired by Wiley in October
17:06:55 [Karen]
…we host about
17:07:01 [Karen]
…30 percent of world's journal articles
17:07:09 [Karen]
…in terms of current front list
17:07:14 [Karen]
…and will grow to 40 percent with Wiley
17:07:15 [brady_duga]
brady_duga has joined #dpub
17:07:19 [david_stroup]
david_stroup has joined #dpub
17:07:23 [Karen]
…online hosting, content development and monetization
17:07:29 [brady_duga]
present+ duga
17:07:29 [Garth]
17:07:29 [Karen]
…Some publishers have EPUB to download
17:07:35 [Karen]
…we don't provide solutions for viewing them
17:07:52 [Karen]
…we are launching a new in-browser, Readium based reader, to deliver journal articles in that format
17:08:01 [Karen]
…address light-way copyright and annotation
17:08:05 [Karen]
Garth: Welcome back into the fold
17:08:07 [ivan]
Present+ Jonathan
17:08:09 [Karen]
Jonathan: thanks, this is fun
17:08:14 [ivan]
zakim, who is here?
17:08:14 [Zakim]
Present: RIck_Johnson, Leonard, Avneesh, ivan, dauwhe, Karen, laudrain, rdeltour, Bill_Kasdorf, Chris_Maden, Peter, Krautzberger, Vlad, Bert, astearns, Deborah_Kaplan, duga,
17:08:18 [Zakim]
... Jonathan
17:08:18 [Zakim]
On IRC I see david_stroup, brady_duga, nickbrown, clapierre, pkra, Bill_Kasdorf, cmaden2, Garth, laudrain, Leonard, BillMcCoy, Vlad, HeatherF, Avneesh, Rick_Johnson, rdeltour,
17:08:18 [Zakim]
... Zakim, RRSAgent, dkaplan3, Karen, chaals, ivan, dauwhe, liam, astearns, plinss, Bert, trackbot, JakeA, bigbluehat, iank_
17:08:27 [ivan]
Present+ Nick_Brown
17:08:39 [Karen]
Garth: I'll give Carley from Pearson a chance to say high; but she sent regrets
17:08:48 [ivan]
Present+ BillMcCoy
17:08:51 [Karen]
…I believe Bill McCoy is on the call to give us an update on the PBG
17:09:03 [Karen]
BillMcCoy: The Publishing Business Group is formed
17:09:14 [dauwhe]
17:09:19 [Karen]
…if you are not sure if your org is eligible, just clicked the join link and we'll address it manually
17:09:34 [Karen]
…First Publishing BG meeting is 10:30am-2:30pm London time
17:09:44 [Karen]
…there is a list, but people are still arriving
17:09:53 [Karen]
…we have a special TPI program for eligible IDPF members
17:10:07 [Karen]
…we should start having email exchanges on the Publishing BG shortly
17:10:19 [Karen]
…the steering committee is active, which is the former IDPF board members
17:10:31 [Karen]
…ultimately the PBG will elect the steering committee
17:10:34 [Karen]
…Agenda is there
17:10:43 [Karen]
…Expect discussions about charter will take place on GitHub
17:10:49 [ivan]
details on the meeting in London:
17:10:55 [Karen]
…there will be people in Publishing BG who are not part of this group, mainly for historical reasons
17:11:00 [Garth]
17:11:02 [bigbluehat]
Present+ Benjamin_Young
17:11:12 [Karen]
…to be as inclusive as possible, would be good if the charter discussions happened in GitHub
17:11:18 [Karen]
…Do you want more details?
17:11:26 [Karen]
Garth: any input as to how the Business Group
17:11:38 [Karen]
…which is expected to provide input to the charter of the WG
17:11:44 [Karen]
…how that process will go, and timing thereof?
17:12:00 [Karen]
BillMcCoy: Chartering of a WG at W3C has many steps, unlike the CG and BGs
17:12:11 [Karen]
…a WG has a number of more steps, including consent of all the W3C members
17:12:33 [Karen]
…we want to get that done as soon as possible, but we want to be inclusive to the whole publishing community
17:12:36 [Karen]
…a balancing act
17:12:44 [Karen]
…this group is ready to move on with the strawman draft charter
17:12:51 [Karen]
…there seems to be significant consensus
17:13:05 [Karen]
…but key factor is to get broader feedback from the community that has not been here for the past two years
17:13:12 [Karen]
…have the charter be attractive to the broader industry
17:13:17 [Karen]
…I don't think it will be that long
17:13:22 [Karen]
…this group has done an excellent job
17:13:33 [Karen]
…I hope the BG can get to a 'looks good to us'
17:13:36 [Garth]
17:13:37 [Karen]
…I'm an optimist
17:13:42 [Leonard]
17:13:55 [Karen]
…hope we can get to this step quickly and get a new WG in place this spring, which is what I think everyone wants to happen
17:14:03 [Karen]
Leonard: Bill, do have any thoughts on how you see conflicts?
17:14:14 [Karen]
…you'd like to hope no bumps in the road
17:14:25 [Karen]
…but on off chance there is a conflict between BG and those who have been working already
17:14:36 [Karen]
…towards this effort, do you have a feeling on how those would be resolved?
17:14:51 [Karen]
BillMcCoy: we have chairs, self-nominated from among the steering committee
17:15:10 [Karen]
…those co-chairs are Paul Belfonti, Rick Johnson and Cristina Mussinelli
17:15:17 [Karen]
…so not a question of which group
17:15:23 [ivan]
17:15:24 [Karen]
…or one of people seeing it for the first time next week
17:15:30 [Karen]
…different perspectives
17:15:42 [Garth]
ack Leo
17:15:43 [Karen]
…from those who have been working on it v those who just arrived
17:16:00 [Karen]
…as you know, the draft charter has been sent to the W3C Advisory Committee
17:16:05 [Karen]
…we want to broaden the perspective
17:16:10 [dauwhe]
17:16:11 [Karen]
…process of consensus is magical
17:16:31 [Karen]
…but I'm confident for Paul, Rick, Cristina, Garth and Tzviya working with Ivan and me
17:16:48 [Karen]
…I hope we get better than rough consensus, but will be pleasantly surprised if we do
17:16:56 [Karen]
Garth: I'm even more of an optimist and will second that
17:16:56 [dauwhe]
17:17:01 [Garth]
17:17:07 [Karen]
…if no more commentary on business group or process stuff
17:17:15 [Garth]
ack dau
17:17:17 [Karen]
Dave: We had some earlier details about 11:30- 2:30
17:17:22 [Karen]
…wiki says 11:30-2:30
17:17:24 [Karen]
17:17:49 [Karen]
Karen: the wiki is correct
17:18:26 [Bill_Kasdorf]
Karen, I think you mis-typed above, it says the wiki says 11:30
17:18:42 [Karen]
s/11:30/10:30am Start
17:18:53 [Karen]
Garth: yes, 10:30am start
17:18:59 [Karen]
Bill: hope everyone can attend
17:19:08 [ivan]
Topic: remaining issues
17:19:10 [BillMcCoy]
publishing business group home page:
17:19:12 [Karen]
Garth: wold be good to publish a less drafty charter
17:19:21 [Karen]
…last week we had two action items jointly on Leonard and David's plate
17:19:27 [Karen]
…online offline and manifest
17:19:34 [Karen]
…chit chat on mailing list this morning
17:19:38 [Karen]
…David's comment
17:19:41 [BillMcCoy]
march 13 kickoff meeting agenda:
17:19:45 [Karen]
…pull link to draft charter under section 2
17:19:48 [Karen]
…bullet 4 and 5
17:19:59 [Karen]
…the one talking about offline, second one talking about manifest
17:20:05 [Karen]
…I saw the email from David, and will be quiet
17:20:09 [Karen]
…and not propose language
17:20:16 [Karen]
…the current text in the draft charter
17:20:18 [ivan]
current github issue on online/offline:
17:20:24 [Karen]
…says [reads]
17:20:43 [Karen]
…email from Dave this morning was let's stay the course and leave that alone
17:20:43 [Garth]
17:20:49 [ivan]
17:20:49 [Karen]
…I don't think that is in the camp Leonard is in
17:20:50 [Leonard]
17:20:56 [Garth]
17:20:56 [BillMcCoy]
side note that W3C is co-sponsoring the EPUB Summit Europe 2017 on march 8-9 in Brussels still time to register see
17:21:00 [Karen]
…not sure if you have synched on this, proposed language
17:21:03 [Karen]
ack Ivan
17:21:10 [Karen]
Ivan: I see question update on irc
17:21:15 [Karen]
…at this moment if we can set a priority
17:21:21 [Karen]
…of the @draft
17:21:32 [Karen]
…I think we have to be in a position of publishing that as well as the ucr asap
17:21:41 [Karen]
…to make it a better document input to the charter process
17:21:45 [Karen]
…that is my priority
17:21:52 [Karen]
…taking into account all things Bill explained
17:22:05 [Karen]
…I am uneasy to touch the charter until the business group is up and running
17:22:16 [Karen]
…I would be uneasy to change things significantly on the charter
17:22:19 [dauwhe]
17:22:21 [Karen]
Garth: maybe an ignorant comment
17:22:34 [Karen]
…I thought the online/offline had been agreed to in the PWP document; is that untrue?
17:22:37 [Karen]
Ivan: It's untrue
17:22:49 [Karen]
…we had a discussion two weeks ago; nothing has changed in PWP document
17:23:01 [Karen]
Garth: I thought it was totally on the charter?
17:23:07 [Karen]
…and not the PWP document
17:23:19 [Karen]
Ivan: It started with some questions that Leonard asked about the PWP document
17:23:27 [Karen]
Leonard: it has gone back and forth
17:23:37 [Karen]
…some stuff copied one from the other document but it's not in synch
17:23:48 [Garth]
17:23:54 [Karen]
…I thought we were going to agree on language in charter and back it into PWP doc; but I don't care which way we go
17:24:09 [Karen]
Ivan: I thought it was the opposite; get the PWP text right and then moving that to the charter
17:24:17 [Karen]
…but I think it can lead to non-technical issues
17:24:35 [Karen]
Leonard: I would rather have the charter text better so that the BG is reading something this group is happy with
17:24:40 [Karen]
Garth: I think there is some possibility
17:24:55 [Karen]
…'that this looks good to us' from business group
17:25:06 [Karen]
…charter is more consumable than PWP and will get more consumption for that reason
17:25:12 [Karen]
…perhaps I neglected to ask you
17:25:23 [Karen]
…Leonard, is there language on the charter language that you and Dave agree upon?
17:25:36 [Karen]
Leonard: that was fine for me; I can completely live with what is there today
17:25:38 [Garth]
17:25:42 [Garth]
ack Leo
17:25:47 [Garth]
ack dau
17:25:52 [Karen]
Garth: that sounds like a halleluia
17:26:07 [Karen]
…I read and that is what it says
17:26:12 [Karen]
…so if Leonard and Dave are happy
17:26:23 [Karen]
…then let's go with what we have there, and maybe we can declare victory
17:26:31 [Garth]
17:26:33 [Karen]
…and I believe Dave is correct that we do match between charter and PWP
17:26:48 [Karen]
…don't want to be quiet for any further disagreement
17:26:57 [Karen]
…Let's note we have reached resolution in online and offline documents
17:27:04 [Karen]
…That brings us to the manifest discussion
17:27:12 [Karen]
…the other one that Dave and Leonard were going to synch on
17:27:24 [Karen]
…again, let me read a few sentences from the draft charter [reads]
17:27:54 [Karen]
…there was discussion two weeks ago about @ and presentation
17:27:59 [Garth]
17:28:02 [Karen]
…or trim that paragraph ever so slightly
17:28:04 [Karen]
…any input
17:28:17 [Karen]
Dave: I apologize for not reaching out to Leonard to work on that language
17:28:20 [Leonard]
Mia culpa from me too...
17:28:25 [Karen]
Garth: happy to open up for some discussion now
17:28:34 [Karen]
…on that
17:28:43 [Leonard]
17:28:47 [Karen]
…my two cents worth is whether manifest is "M" or "m" as loose term
17:28:48 [dauwhe]
17:28:53 [Karen]
…needs to be something about sequence somehwere
17:29:02 [Karen]
…one can argue about sequence and presentation
17:29:13 [Karen]
…I believe that was Leonard's proposal to drop sequence and presentation
17:29:21 [Karen]
…I expect we'll dig into that when we have the WG going
17:29:27 [Karen]
Leonard: my issue remains
17:29:43 [Karen]
…we can talk about sequence and presentation in the context of metadata and manifest
17:30:03 [Karen]
…but constiutent resources implies images and fonts and data that have nothing to do with sequence and presentation
17:30:13 [Karen]
…I would put a period after presentation
17:30:23 [hadrien]
hadrien has joined #dpub
17:30:30 [Karen]
…and end after sequence and presentation…full stop
17:30:36 [Karen]
Dave: I'm fine with that, too
17:30:51 [Karen]
…manifest will need various information besides raw accounting of constituent resources
17:30:55 [Karen]
Leonard: Let me write something in irc
17:30:56 [Karen]
17:30:58 [BillMcCoy]
I just recommend that we do this all via github issues not via this meeting
17:31:08 [Karen]
Garth: I propose we take a 25 second break for that post to come in
17:31:17 [BillMcCoy]
take it now and put it in as a github issue??
17:31:20 [Karen]
Garth: Appreciate Bill's comment, but I want to take it now
17:31:25 [Karen]
…and get it back into the draft
17:31:27 [Leonard]
"The metadata and manifest will also incorporate information about the sequence and presentation of the content"
17:31:27 [Karen]
…ok, Bill
17:31:33 [BillMcCoy]
so that draft changes come via github issues...
17:31:41 [Garth]
17:31:41 [Karen]
Leonard: take as is, or word smith ok
17:31:47 [Karen]
Ivan: Make it clear that this includes the fact that
17:31:58 [Karen]
…resource of publication [full stop] and then your phrase
17:32:06 [Karen]
Leonard: yes, that was implied
17:32:07 [dauwhe]
17:32:10 [Leonard]
17:32:10 [Karen]
Garth: That looks fine to me
17:32:11 [Garth]
17:32:16 [Bill_Kasdorf]
17:32:16 [Karen]
…This is great
17:32:20 [ivan]
q+ to practicalities
17:32:21 [Karen]
…Let's get that change into the charter
17:32:36 [Karen]
…and then we have both offline and Leonard or Ivan, who wants to do the charter change?
17:32:43 [Karen]
ack Ivan
17:32:43 [Zakim]
ivan, you wanted to practicalities
17:32:51 [Karen]
Ivan: I will do this change on the charter tomorrow morning my time
17:32:56 [Karen]
…and some minor organizational things
17:33:05 [Karen]
…and I'll check if same language is used on draft
17:33:09 [Karen]
…make sure they are both in synch
17:33:18 [Karen]
…eager to see these be as mature as possible
17:33:21 [Karen]
Garth: Great
17:33:42 [Karen]
…if we can not re-open the online/offline and manifest discussions until we get to charter review or the real WG
17:33:48 [Avneesh]
17:33:55 [dkaplan3]
17:33:55 [Karen]
…Do we have an update from the Accessibility TF from the recharter update?
17:33:58 [dkaplan3]
17:33:58 [Garth]
17:33:59 [Karen]
ack Avneesh
17:34:14 [Karen]
Avneesh: Yes, so we have defined the task further; it was posted to the mailing list
17:34:19 [Karen]
…we have not received all responses
17:34:30 [Karen]
…but we have received some and it looks like it is moving towards resolution
17:34:36 [Karen]
…some people traveling to CSUN
17:34:45 [Karen]
…may be why responses are sloow
17:34:48 [Karen]
17:35:00 [Karen]
Garth: You would get consensus in the TF and then propose language to the larger group?
17:35:06 [Karen]
Avneesh: yes, that is the plan
17:35:16 [Garth]
17:35:23 [dkaplan3]
17:35:25 [Karen]
George: Avneesh and I have agreed on what we think is the right language
17:35:33 [Karen]
…Charles, Deborah, others, happy to have you chime in
17:35:40 [Karen]
…but want to make sure others have a chance to look at it
17:35:46 [ivan]
17:35:57 [Karen]
Garth: If that can be driven forward in next couple of days, and then put on agenda for a week from today
17:36:10 [Garth]
17:36:10 [dkaplan3]
17:36:14 [Karen]
…or let us know we don't have to talk about; or as agenda, that would be awesome
17:36:16 [Karen]
ack Dave
17:36:23 [Karen]
Deborah: that should be fine
17:36:29 [Karen]
…conversations on email list this morning
17:36:32 [Karen]
…should not be a problem
17:36:33 [Garth]
17:36:36 [Karen]
…just have to make things shorter
17:36:41 [Karen]
Garth: Short is always good
17:36:53 [Karen]
…Ivan, I was going to ask him to talk logistics about getting these docs public
17:36:58 [Karen]
Ivan: essentially yes
17:37:06 [Karen]
…the changes we discussed earlier reflect consensus
17:37:15 [Karen]
…so I will put into the main branch tomorrow morning
17:37:22 [Leonard]
17:37:26 [Karen]
…but I would like to put the Accessibility into a separate pull request
17:37:34 [Karen]
…and not put that directly into the main branch
17:37:40 [Karen]
…put into a separate branch
17:37:43 [Karen]
…The other question is that
17:37:56 [Karen]
…the discussion we are having for the Accessibility is really relevant for the draft
17:38:00 [Karen]
…I think the draft is ok
17:38:19 [Karen]
…we are word smithing here to be appropriate, but not really appropriate for the draft
17:38:26 [Karen]
…shall I talk about practicalities?
17:38:38 [Karen]
Garth: Next agenda item is next steps, so yes, Ivan
17:38:46 [Karen]
Ivan: the charter we have discussed it will be there
17:39:00 [Karen]
…at this moment I know there are two open issues in the issue list
17:39:08 [Karen]
…which I propose this group not get into too much
17:39:17 [Karen]
…they are much more business rather than technical questions
17:39:23 [Karen]
…Bill McCoy can tell me if I am right or not
17:39:39 [Karen]
…one issue is around the exact position of WP v EPUB 4
17:39:46 [Karen]
…what do we mean by backward compatability
17:39:58 [Karen]
…which I expect will be a larger discussion with BG and AC
17:40:05 [Karen]
…we should not touch that right now
17:40:10 [Karen]
…Other comment that came up
17:40:15 [Karen]
…comments on issue of DRM
17:40:24 [Karen]
…I welcome you to look at the few issues there
17:40:36 [Karen]
…again, I think this is more up the alley of the BG
17:40:40 [Karen]
…am I right, Bill?
17:40:53 [Karen]
Bill: not sure what the engagement will be, but I do agree the BG is the right place for the discussion
17:40:58 [Garth]
17:41:02 [Karen]
…since we don't have the BG rolling, it's more hypothetical
17:41:07 [Karen]
…I don't disagree with you
17:41:22 [Karen]
Garth: maybe I'm taking more happy pills than Bill on EPUB4 backward compatability
17:41:30 [Karen]
…it has somewhat petered out
17:41:36 [Karen]
…maybe we are close to a resolution on that
17:41:40 [Karen]
Ivan: I am less optimistic
17:41:43 [Karen]
…I think everyone is waiting
17:41:59 [dauwhe]
17:42:05 [Karen]
…one of people who started the discussion is Daniel Glazman, who realizes where this conversation will take place
17:42:08 [Karen]
Garth: we shall see
17:42:16 [Garth]
17:42:18 [Karen]
…Daniel is not shy about disagreeing with me
17:42:20 [Karen]
Ivan: agreed
17:42:26 [Karen]
Garth: Who else...
17:42:26 [Garth]
ack ivan
17:42:33 [Karen]
Ivan: I will go on with the other documents
17:42:35 [Karen]
…let's get Dave
17:42:40 [Karen]
ack Dave
17:42:49 [Karen]
Dave: Another question about the scope of the EPUB3 CG
17:42:55 [Karen]
…what branch will be acceptable
17:43:01 [Karen]
Ivan: to come back to the other two documents
17:43:13 [Karen]
…those two are ready to be published as drafts
17:43:22 [Karen]
…we had short discussion about whether they should be drafts or notes
17:43:27 [Karen]
…Dave said should not be a note
17:43:38 [Karen]
…I am lukewarm on both sides, just important to have them be published
17:43:46 [Karen]
…I will go through the documents, mainly editorially
17:43:55 [Karen]
…Respect comes up with a few things
17:43:56 [Garth]
17:44:05 [Leonard]
17:44:13 [Karen]
…I will get both docs into a format that can be published right away and we should have a resolution to publihs
17:44:21 [Garth]
ack dau
17:44:23 [Karen]
…and then I take care of it with the W3C web master
17:44:27 [Karen]
Garth: Dave?
17:44:35 [Karen]
…Leonard, go ahead
17:44:44 [Karen]
Leonard: I will add to tracker; but we have not discussed 3.2
17:44:51 [Karen]
…whether we leave them in the initial charter or not
17:44:57 [Karen]
…under potential rec track deliverables
17:45:07 [Karen]
…someone has a comment on whether we go down that path at all
17:45:10 [Karen]
ivan: the someone is me
17:45:26 [Karen]
Leonard: we don't want charter to go out with that editorial note; so do we leave or remove 3.2
17:45:39 [Garth]
17:45:46 [Karen]
Garth: my proposal that this is biting off more than we want to in this group, so we should remove, but open to other opinions
17:45:50 [ivan]
17:45:51 [Karen]
Leonard: I agree with you
17:45:52 [Garth]
ack Leo
17:46:00 [Karen]
..we should remove from charter, no active interest and we have enough to do
17:46:01 [Rick_Johnson]
+1 to remove for now
17:46:04 [Karen]
…we can always add work
17:46:08 [Karen]
ack Ivan
17:46:16 [Karen]
Ivan: point is we cannot add to group just like that
17:46:24 [Karen]
…what we put into charter later requires rechartering
17:46:41 [Leonard]
17:46:44 [Karen]
…at the moment the text stays the following deliverables may be...[reads]
17:46:59 [Karen]
…the goal was, it leaves the door open but makes it dependent on some incubation coming in
17:47:04 [Karen]
…with that, I would propose leaving it in
17:47:10 [Karen]
…it may not fly with W3M or whomever
17:47:15 [Garth]
17:47:16 [Karen]
…but at this moment I would be uneasy to take it out
17:47:23 [Karen]
…getting it in again may be much more difficult
17:47:27 [Garth]
ack Leo
17:47:28 [Karen]
Leonard: I would say the other way around
17:47:38 [Karen]
…well, if we take it out, we can do that work elsewhere
17:47:40 [ivan]
17:47:51 [Karen]
…not every piece of publications work has to be in a single WG
17:47:56 [Karen]
…we are in agreement on the main points
17:48:06 [Karen]
…if someone actually came with an incubation or proposal, let's start another WG
17:48:17 [Karen]
…they are not core to our goals; let them happen somewhere else
17:48:20 [Garth]
ack ivan
17:48:28 [Karen]
Ivan: In general, I would agree with you
17:48:43 [Karen]
…the problem is that the current set-up with IDPF members is that they can only join one WG
17:48:54 [dauwhe]
17:48:55 [Karen]
Leonard: But these things are completely new things, never discussed by the IDPF
17:49:07 [Karen]
Ivan: that is true; is it outside the interest?
17:49:14 [Garth]
17:49:16 [Garth]
17:49:16 [BillMcCoy]
17:49:24 [Karen]
Leonard: maybe but they should become involved and join as full members
17:49:29 [Karen]
Dave: seems to be some fragmentation
17:49:39 [Karen]
…to spin up new groups for them
17:49:45 [Garth]
ack dau
17:49:50 [Karen]
…not have 70 different CSS WGs for example
17:50:05 [Karen]
BillMcCoy: This would be a great thing to discuss with the new PBG
17:50:13 [Karen]
…at end of the day we have to have an achievable WG charter
17:50:23 [Karen]
…but would not be terrible if scope is bigger than what is accomplished
17:50:26 [Karen]
…I can see both sides
17:50:34 [Karen]
…but I don't want to see a parallel working group
17:50:42 [Karen]
…for things that should be part of Publishing@W3C
17:50:43 [Garth]
17:50:49 [Garth]
ack Bill
17:50:57 [Karen]
…the spirit of the commitment is to participate in Publishing@W3C things
17:51:03 [Leonard]
17:51:06 [Karen]
…and understood that it would be more than was at IDPF
17:51:16 [ivan]
17:51:19 [Karen]
…not fully in agreement with Leonard, but I am also not insisting that things in 3.2 stay
17:51:22 [Karen]
…will be logical
17:51:26 [Garth]
17:51:26 [Karen]
…sorry for mushy answer
17:51:32 [Karen]
Garth: I am in a similar mushy place
17:51:32 [Rick_Johnson]
17:51:39 [ivan]
17:51:39 [Karen]
…no way we can get to PWP mission
17:51:55 [Karen]
…if the text is here, we may do this, I don't have a lot of religion one way or another
17:52:03 [Leonard]
17:52:05 [Karen]
…whether we get too dinged as being too wishy-washy for charter
17:52:06 [Garth]
17:52:11 [Karen]
…or if concern of BG
17:52:14 [Karen]
ack Rick
17:52:18 [Karen]
Rick: mostly an observer to this
17:52:27 [Karen]
…I had said +1 in the thread and wanted to explain my thoughts
17:52:32 [Karen]
…we feel like we want to talk about this
17:52:42 [Karen]
…and if we keep it as a placeholder, it makes it easier to talk about it
17:52:48 [Karen]
…I think we are talking a bit in circles there
17:53:00 [Karen]
…if after we form, and we want to talk about, that is the level for discussion for the charter
17:53:05 [Garth]
17:53:09 [Karen]
…let's not confuse it by having a place there now
17:53:15 [Karen]
Garth: so your plus one is to remove for now
17:53:33 [Garth]
17:53:35 [Karen]
Rick: yes, remove for now, and if we want to talk about it, bring about it through harder process and talk about it afterward
17:53:41 [Karen]
George: I have my hand up
17:54:01 [Karen]
…if this is not in the charter and we want to move it into the discussion, is that all 'legal' in W3C?
17:54:12 [Karen]
Ivan: That is what I was saying, can be done later but only if we re-charter
17:54:26 [Karen]
Garth: is that true if we define these APIs as part of WP, does charter limit us?
17:54:31 [Karen]
Ivan: i think that would be pushing it
17:54:40 [BillMcCoy]
17:54:42 [Karen]
…I think we would be forced to make a new charter or recharter or create a new WG
17:54:52 [Karen]
…think about fact that we are talking about IPR commitments
17:54:52 [Garth]
17:55:02 [Karen]
…not seeing charter without those IPR commitments
17:55:21 [Karen]
…would not think about APIs, except for company like Google that has a lot of APIs
17:55:26 [Karen]
Garth: I cede to your wisdom
17:55:35 [Karen]
BillMcCoy: Maybe a more general statement about APIs
17:55:46 [Karen]
…currently sounds like we have concrete plans for two APIs
17:55:54 [Karen]
…maybe a more general statement
17:55:54 [ivan]
17:55:58 [ivan]
ack brady_duga
17:55:59 [Garth]
ack Bill
17:56:01 [Karen]
…without stating clearly what we want to do
17:56:02 [ivan]
ack BillMcCoy
17:56:06 [Karen]
Garth: I have little religion on this
17:56:13 [Karen]
…but want to get to another topic shortly
17:56:22 [Karen]
Ivan: I don't think what Bill is saying will fly
17:56:25 [BillMcCoy]
I defer to Ivan on what will fly w/ AC
17:56:29 [Karen]
…knowing how AC is working these days
17:56:41 [Karen]
…we refer to the PWP draft; gives some sort of technical background
17:56:43 [Karen]
…which is now
17:56:46 [Karen]
…leading to the charter
17:56:52 [Karen]
…that PWP draft has nothing about APIs
17:56:57 [Karen]
…I am a little afraid it will not fly
17:57:01 [Karen]
…Listening to the reactions
17:57:07 [Karen]
…I am fine if we decide to take it out
17:57:16 [Karen]
…I am a little worried if there is really a need
17:57:29 [Karen]
…Maybe what Rick said, if there is really a need, then a rechartering of the group may be a good thing to do
17:57:40 [Karen]
…it would draw attention of other companies and participants to specific work
17:57:44 [Karen]
…maybe that is a good thing to do
17:57:47 [Karen]
…I am not bound to keeping it
17:58:02 [Karen]
Garth: I am personally happy taking it out under that wisdom
17:58:16 [Karen]
…i don't see us wanting to think about it impacting our work on WP and the P portion thereof
17:58:30 [Karen]
…are there others on the call who disagree with taking it out for now with any verve?
17:58:38 [Karen]
…Let's count that as consensus and remove 3.2 for now
17:58:40 [Garth]
17:58:41 [Karen]
17:58:48 [Garth]
ack ivan
17:58:50 [Karen]
…ack Ivan
17:58:54 [Karen]
17:58:55 [BillMcCoy]
again I recommend removing it via github issue so the edit history is clear to both AC reps who've received advance notice and new PBG members
17:58:59 [Rick_Johnson]
17:59:01 [Karen]
Garth: last on the agenda
17:59:15 [Karen]
…proposed F2F for this group in NYC following BEA
17:59:22 [Karen]
…not too many people want to participate in the F2F
17:59:32 [Karen]
…realistically the same folks from BEA
17:59:37 [Karen]
…and not stay over the weekend
17:59:55 [Karen]
…Friday/Saturday is equally problematic for our Jewish contingent
18:00:00 [Karen]
…result from poll thus far
18:00:05 [Karen]
…and encourage others to fill out
18:00:12 [Karen]
…we have ten in person and five remote interested
18:00:18 [Karen]
…Tzviya seems to be willing to attend
18:00:20 [Garth]
18:00:24 [Karen]
…i think we should stay the course with this schedule
18:00:28 [Rick_Johnson]
18:00:31 [Karen]
…but encourage other people to flesh it out
18:00:42 [Karen]
…Ivan and I will be on an agenda planning call next week
18:00:49 [Garth]
18:00:53 [Karen]
…Let's get together this following Monday
18:01:01 [Karen]
George: the 5th and 6th?
18:01:04 [Karen]
Garth: yes
18:01:09 [Karen]
…let's talk again next Monday
18:01:10 [nickbrown]
nickbrown has left #dpub
18:01:14 [clapierre]
clapierre has left #dpub
18:01:15 [Karen]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:01:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Karen
18:01:21 [laudrain]
laudrain has left #dpub
18:01:30 [ivan]
zakim, who is here?
18:01:30 [Zakim]
Present: RIck_Johnson, Leonard, Avneesh, ivan, dauwhe, Karen, laudrain, rdeltour, Bill_Kasdorf, Chris_Maden, Peter, Krautzberger, Vlad, Bert, astearns, Deborah_Kaplan, duga,
18:01:34 [Zakim]
... Jonathan, Nick_Brown, BillMcCoy, Benjamin_Young
18:01:34 [Zakim]
On IRC I see hadrien, david_stroup, pkra, Bill_Kasdorf, cmaden2, Garth, BillMcCoy, Vlad, HeatherF, Rick_Johnson, Zakim, RRSAgent, Karen, chaals, ivan, dauwhe, liam, astearns,
18:01:34 [Zakim]
... plinss, Bert, trackbot, JakeA, bigbluehat, iank_
18:02:02 [cmaden2]
cmaden2 has left #dpub
18:02:18 [ivan]
trackbot, end telcon
18:02:18 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
18:02:19 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been RIck_Johnson, Leonard, Avneesh, ivan, dauwhe, Karen, laudrain, rdeltour, Bill_Kasdorf, Chris_Maden, Peter, Krautzberger, Vlad, Bert,
18:02:21 [Zakim]
... astearns, Deborah_Kaplan, duga, Jonathan, Nick_Brown, BillMcCoy, Benjamin_Young
18:02:26 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:02:26 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
18:02:27 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
18:02:27 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items
18:02:29 [pkra]
pkra has joined #dpub