<HeatherF> I'll be a few minutes late (on a call that's running over. Bill Kasdorf is on the same call.)

<scribe> scribe: rdeltour

<tzviya> https://www.w3.org/2016/11/21-dpub-minutes.html

tzviya: any comments on the meeting from last week?
... minutes approved!
... not expecting a lot of discussion on the first 2 items
... we have these ongoing documents (PWP-UCR and DPUB-PWP)

<tzviya> http://w3c.github.io/dpub-pwp-ucr/index.html

tzviya: keep the issues coming, your input matters

<tzviya> http://w3c.github.io/dpub-pwp/

tzviya: just a general reminder that we're hoping to go to 2nd Public Working Draft in mid-december
... we did major changes and need some feedback
... if you know someone, please pass it along
... we also need feedback on the Web Publications document
... BillK, I received your comments, you can put it in as a GitHub issue
... any comments?

WCAG 2.1 and Digital Publishing

tzviya: 2 issues affect DPUB
... 1: the concept of collection of documents and 2. the need for metadata
... a number of the people I hoped would join are not here today
... do we have enough people here to discuss this? WDYT?

Katie: it feels like there should be more people

tzivya: what's the timelime for WCAG 2.1?

katie: the FPWD is expected in late feb or march next year
... I can send an email to WCAG WG to say key people were not here and ask them to come next week

george: my understanding was Dec 1st was the cut-off date

avneesh: if we need more time we need consensus from WCAG people

geroge: I reviewed all the email threads on this
... it seems a web page is the appropriate category and we should be covered

<tzviya> set of web pages:https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#set-of-web-pagesdef

geroge: we need an example of a web publication as a set of web pages
... Matt had some language that we could add as an example

<Avneesh> definition from Matt: "Example: A publication is split across multiple Web pages, where each page contains one chapter or other significant section of the work. The publication is logically a single contiguous unit, and contains navigation features that enable access to the full set of pages."

geroge: we could then include more specific info on digital publication in WCAG 2.1

tzviya: there was also discussion on work that could happen, not necessarily in WCAG
... I can't remember the name of the group who worked on that.

avneesh: was it from David McDonald?

tzivya: yes, David recommended that we could review this document first
... do we want to spend a few minutes just figuring out what DPUB needs to do?
... then offer some time next Monday

Katie: we can give some options. If they want to give us more time beyond Dec 1st

tzviya: so, we have Matt's language that can be added to WCAG 2.1
... Davd McDonald would need to agree
... and hopefully that would resolve the concept of "publication", which affects the DPUB group in general
... to DPUB people: we're not defining the concept of publication or packaging in general, we're talking about definitions that can be used in the WCAG context
... where the concept of web pages is already defined

george: if we can get this now as an example, then it is clearly in scope for WCAG 2.1
... the fear is that digital publishing could not be in scope because it wasn't in the work statement

tzivya: the concept of a package or bundle or whatever, is not only for digital publishing (see the thread on packages for the web). We can remind WCAG about that
... the other issue is metadata
... issue 1 is whether metadata should be treated as a technique or best practice, or should be completely excluded from this revisions
... it seems we're leaning to the direction of a best practice

george: wasn't the term "best practice" a proposed new category?

katie: yes, because we were talking about possible multiple version of WCAG, silver after 2.1, etc
... organisations that wouldn't be able to update to a new version could still implement a SC from these new standards as a best practice
... when they do switch to the new standard for legal reasons, they would already be in good shape
... but in the mean time can't be sued for it

avneesh: there was also another concept that if we can provide the bare minimum meteadata we could include it as SC in 2.1
... we were discussing accessibility-features and accessibility-summary, as a proper SC
... (in adddition to the "best practice" section)

tzivya: we're talking about AAA features?

avneesh: yes
... there was an action item for Katie to write a small document on metadata

<tzviya> https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/appendixC.html

katie: yes, for me and Wilco

tzivya: there's also already an appendix on metadata, we need to see how it fits in
... I think we now know exactly what to address
... we have a proposal of a concept of publication to be included
... we have a proposal of SC for some metadata
... we have a proposal of a best practice section for metadata

charles: one comment is that we still didn't have formal acceptance for our accessibility metadata

tzivya: do we have a timelime?

avneesh: it's in the hands of schema.org, it's waiting to be pushed out, but the release date depends on them
... it's about accessiblity summary, accessmode sufficient but accessibility features is already there

tzviya: I can try to ping them

avneesh: I think for the WCAG best practices part it should not matter if the things are published on schema.org

george: we just need to be official when WCAG 2.1 is further along

katie: I don't know anything with schema.org's timeline, chaals might know

tzviya: I'm going to send these minutes to WCAG people
... hopefully we'll be able to work this out within a week
... any thing else from a larger DPUB perspective?

new members

karen: I'd like the group to start thinking about all the new members that are going to come over, towards the end of january
... I'm thinking of the kind of communication that you'd like to receive if you're in their shoes
... we welcome help and volunteers in this effort
... what can we be doing to onboard new members

tzviya: it's really good point
... I've been talking to the positive work environment task force, about the onboarding process
... I'll be on leave, but need somebody to step up to do this in my place
... it's a really good idea to di somthing a bit more than sendong an email

charles: quick question, what's the process to get the charter? how is it going to happen when IDPF members join?

tzivya: I have a chartering meeting planned on Tuesday 6th, and will have more info after that
... at some point there will be a public version of the draft charter before we go to a vote.
... I don't have a timeline but it's not a quick process
... we also have a legal process in the background

charles: does the IG have any influence on the WG?

katie: usually an IG guides incubates the ideas addressed by the WG
... it identifies the things that need to be standardized, then the WG works on the standard itsefl

tzviya: I think the IG is going to be replaced by the WG
... but don't want to answer specifically since I don't know the details
... any other questions?

(silence)

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.148  of Date: 2016/10/11 12:55:14  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/digitral/digital/
Succeeded: s/dibgital/digital/
Succeeded: s/sitll/still/
Succeeded: s/di/do/
Succeeded: s/shows/shoes/
Found Scribe: rdeltour
Inferring ScribeNick: rdeltour
Present: dauwhe tzviya Avneesh Deborah_Kaplan Katie_Haritos-Shea scribe Charles_LaPierre Bert Karen George astearns Bill_Kasdorf Heather_Flanagan Chris_Maden
Regrets: vlad leonard garth ivan daniel luc laurent matt Peter Wilco Matt
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2016Nov/0108.html
Got date from IRC log name: 28 Nov 2016
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/11/28-dpub-minutes.html
People with action items: