Digital Publishing Interest Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 02 February 2015

<HeatherF> I'm having trouble dialing in to the zakim bridge today. It's not letting me reconnect.

<tzviya> scribenick: pkra

see what i did there

mgylling: start off: objections to approving last week's minutes?

<ivan> scribenick: pkra

mgylling: none. Thanks.
... first part: EPUB-Web next steps.

<tzviya> minutes: http://www.w3.org/2015/01/26-dpub-minutes.html

<tzviya> and I forgot to write a summary!

mgylling: second part: short update from TFs

<HeatherF> My IP calling to the zakim bridge is failing miserably this morning - I will email my update re: i18n info.

mgylling: back in november, Ivan, mgylling published the white paper epub-web

<ivan> White paper

mgylling: discussed in Santa Clara, some feedback otherwise.
... paints a vision for a future scenario of digital publishing.
... modernized view of portable documents, in the context of OWP
... how does it related to OWP, epub etc? Online and portable are not distinction but just states.
... to be clear: white paper, first attempt at future vision. No rec-trac, WG etc.
... what it's trying to get to: work on topics raised in the paper, functional requirements, use cases etc.
... then make informed decisions for next steps.
... after publication in November, will be co-published of IDPF and W3C with more exposure
... update is drafted right now

<ivan> Issue tracker

mgylling: accompanying article to discuss prerequisites, business case etc is being worked on by Bill McCoy etc
... please review and provide feedback. Use the issue tracker.

<tzviya> -->issue tracker: https://github.com/w3c/epubweb/issues

mgylling: Also: this Spring we want to start making informed decisions. This means getting the right stakeholders to the table.
... W3C and IDPF are not all there is. Would like to attract more.
... @group: how can you help us with outreach?
... first step is co-published version. Then bring it with us to LBF, BEA etc.

<laudrain> How do you see relation with future version of EPUB3 (3.1)?

Nick: paper is well done already, very good mission statement. What is the intended goal for publishing the paper? Just bring more ppl to the table or other expected methods of communication? E.g., webinar to work through paper, online discussion etc.

mgylling: re goals. Clarify: outreach or the work?

Nick: is the goal of the paper to educate ppl in the group, bring in new ppl, something else?

mgylling: find out how many organizations are interested in realizing the work.
... before starting work, it would be good to be in touch with the functional requirements. Right now "shallow" and we want to add more depth in terms of requirements.

Ivan: re outreach. That's something we are discussing ourselves. So we're happy to get suggestions there as well.
... once we have the separate article, we will try to publish it somewhere, make more noise about it.
... then there are several events where we want to talk about it.
... with tzviya will be in Toronto. Ivan in Paris in March
... perhaps something for IDPF conf in NYC.
... if you have ideas, please share with us.
... webinar is something we should think about. But perhaps for a later point.

Paul: is it on target for edpub in Phoenix?

mgylling: no dedicated session but part of planning session.

<Karen> +1 webinar; high-level or technical level

dauwhe: would like to stress outreach to browser makers. Implementation challenge will exist. Getting feedback as early as possible would be wise.

<tzviya> +1

Ivan: yes, critical. we'll be using W3C contacts.

tzviya: in background we've been discussing how the work we've been dealing with in the group touches this. In particular, the TF work.

<ivan> +1 to Bill

Bill_ in terms of outreach / evangelization: keep expectation management in mind, in particular with publishers. Ppl might think "this is the next epub" or "I better wait for this"

scribe: we don't want that to happen.

<Ralph> +1 to Bill

scribe: if they see a new packaging spec in the W3C, then ppl shouldn't think "that's vs IDPF packaging" but rather: "these will converge"

mgylling: important to provide joint timeline.

Ivan: we're aiming exactly for something like that.

Julie: comment: BISG should be able to help in various ways for outreach. E.g. content structure committee. I wonder if distilled version would be feasible. "10 things you need to know about epub-web now" with points that are important for publishing etc.

<Karen> +1 higher level take-aways

<clapierre1> +1

Bill_ thanks, yes.

laudrain: re new versions of epub3. How will e.g. epub3.1 be positioned vs epub-web?

mgylling: next epub3 update is short term update, small iteration, backward compatible. Very distinct.

tzviya: as mentioned in discussion: IDPF hoping to iterate epub while W3C iterates its work, and the two converge.

<laudrain> +1

TimCole: often when you want to take a package off the web (as portable) you decide what package to take. Re 3.7 user customization. Can the user decide what they'll take?

mgylling: yes, there'll be that kind of customizability. Or rather: not prevented, building blocks for content personalization. Good use case.
... Second part: consequences for the IG.
... we've been working on use cases and functionality requirements. The paper includes many references.
... we could look at various TF efforts, reflecting parts of the requirements gathering, building of solutions. But moving forward, should we create one or more TFs to better understand the problem?

<mgylling> ach mgy

<ivan> http://w3c.github.io/epubweb/#achieving-convergence-work-areas

mgylling: e.g., from problem list. Lots of these we already have activities working towards.
... generic archive format, metadata, styling/layout/pagination, presentation control, personalization etc
... but not complete "coverage"
... what should we focus on sooner rather than later?

tzviya: we might need a few ppl working on packaging. Maybe not a whole task force

Ivan: relative high priority. Should flow into the relevant WG from the start.
... we're coming in at the right moment and we must make use of that.

mgylling: right now mgylling, tzviya, Liza, brady
... one activity: understand requirements from publishing perspective. Assert that the needs are met.
... streamability not the only requirement for a package.

tzviya: can offer 1 publisher perspective.

<Ralph> Tzviya++

mgylling: another big one: document&fragment identification.

<Bill_Kasdorf> s/assert/ascertain

mgylling: we need something here. Don't know if the problem is well enough described in the white paper.

<Bill_Kasdorf> +1

mgylling: maybe good fit for metadat TF?

Bill_Kasdorf: yes.

tzviya: also overlaps with packaging.

Ivan: re identifier/linkage ppl who worked on metadata are usually sensitive to the needs.
... metadata TF's work is now at equilibrium so sounds like a good idea.

mgylling: rumor last year for media fragments WG (?) restarting.
... that would be great fit if it happens.
... next example: security & privacy models. Everybody wants it, everybody worried. We would love more input.

<Bill_Kasdorf> note that the fragmentation issue also includes the issue of inheritance of metadata, which is another fit for the Metadata TF

mgylling: if you have suggestions for ppl, do let us know.

Karen: might make sense to have briefing with domain lead Wendy Seltzer (?) about liaison with Technology and Society Domain Staff about Security and Privacy and WebCrypto WGs rechartered.
... should get together with Wendy's group.

<Karen> s/Zelter/Seltzer

mgylling: end of Feb. publication.
... tie additional work to this.
... additional efforts on packaging, doc identifier.
... second part: updates from TFs please
... first off Deborah and Charles.

Charles: met with number of ppl twice a week. Started to work on WCAG spec and techniques, go through them, taking on chunks, identifying relevance.
... about a dozen main topic areas.
... left now: client side scripting, common failures, parts of HTML-specifics. The rest we've reviewed for digipub.
... the reviewers have classified with comments.
... will focus on WCAG first. Had George Kerschner and ??? to offer directions
... after finishing first round: bring it to wiki format.
... identify what's limiting for digital publishing and what's sufficient.

<tzviya> s/Charles(Jeanne Spellman)/clapierre

Charles: identify what's missing from these documents wrt digital publishing.
... many volunteers but not many able to be active.
... we could use extra help.

<Karen> Scribenick: Karen

Peter: We are scheduled...

some last-minute feedback on surveys to work in

scribe: plan to send survey to a first group of people who were targeted
... We have this longer list to send the survey to
... It is still open if you have some good contacts, please send me an email
... Don't put email on the public Google doc
... unless people are comfortable with public email
... Question I have
... go through question in batches
... maybe first 10-15 people to have wider set of testers
... My questions is should we aim for a more public run later
... after we survey the people we have identified
... Should we do anything more public?
... to amass more data
... Not sure if necessary or useful
... but I wanted to ask

Markus: Maybe we will be in a better position to answer that after the first run

<ivan> +1 to markus

Peter: that makes sense
... if good people don't provide good feedback, then we would not have...
... Yes, let's go ahead with that

Tzviya: This is a formal action item
... Have you sent survey out; can we close it?

Peter: No, I will do it this week

Tzviya: We can close action 34

Peter: look forward to that
... want to work out a couple of bugs and hopefully send out tomorroe

Tzviya: Thank you

<pkra> mgylling: ARIA / struct. semantics

<pkra> tzviya: we've been working with ARIA DPUB TF.

<ivan> scribenick: pkra

Tzviya: shifting the terms into ARIA notations.
... heated discussion for footnotes

mgylling: first editor draft end of Feb.

tzviya: first draft of digipub vocab as ARIA module.

mgylling: link to repo?

Ivan: will add it.

mgylling: up next: i18n review.

Ivan: Heather couldn't get on the call due to Zakim problems. Liza not here either.

mgylling: postponed.

<ivan> the structural semantics document

<HeatherF> I did post an update to the public digipub list

mgylling: next up: houdini cluster

<HeatherF> Hopefully that will give folks something to think about before the next call.

Brady: not much since last time. Feedback into the Wiki page.

mgylling: are we approaching a point where we can ask for more widespread review?

Brady: yes. Needs more widespread review.
... need feedback from implementors.

mgylling: will get some from IDPF
... re personalization. We said last week. We'll collect and collate what's in the wiki (it's spread out) clean up. mgylling, tzviya and Liza working on that. Please add yourself.
... as TimCole pointed out, scope of content should be in there.

pkra: MathWG has put out a note on speech annotation for MathML.
... please provide feedback. pkra will post link to group.

Ivan: for whitepaper, plz send all comments on digipub list. And I mean all of them.

<clapierre1> Thanks Peter