<scribe> ScribeNick: clapierre1

DPUB WG Charter - Accessibility gaps concerning A11Y in WCAG etc…

Avneesh: complexities, epub a11y 1.0 where does the continued work on this spec fall?
... , but EPUB will be redefined in WG

<clapierre> maintained and developed for the EPUB community now until the WG standard is approved.  At that point people can transition from EPUB 3 to whatever the WG ends up calling it.  There will be the need to be able to move EPUB content into the future, so the upgrading EPUB 2/3 materials into WG comes up with for on/off line use.  I dont' think there will be backward compatibility but FWD compatibility moving fwd.

matt: we want a A11Y subgroup in DPUB WG and WCAG. Some of the issues are WCAG, some are ARIA. cordination within web publications.

deborah: the Note last year, many of these issues were WCAG, some were UA issues. Addressed UA/Reading systems / content creations, some resolved as ARIA. The DPUB IG we can only talk about these things. How can we have a stronger way to show importance other than just the Note.
... , should the IG exist at all? there are many things for Digital publishing on accessiblity. where is this research and .

george: EPUB 3 CG focused on EPUB things apart and separate.
... , the prosposed WG has relationship with other WG within the w3c, with colaborations with CSS we got dropcap, that was developed in CSS not in DPUB IG.
... , the proposed WG there will come up a11y issues, headings proper structure in the publication. or do we hand this req. off to WCAG 2.1 or 3.
... we dont' want to contradict the WG or is it in the IG

avneesh: where is the EPUB a11y 1.0 going? looks like more favorable in CG. do we have any counter argument.
... , future work for a11y in WG split things in 3 parts. 1. features of DPUB that can be incorp. in WCAG, 2. tuff to get into WCAG a11y metadata or skipable. 3. kind of tech which doesn't exist in W3C eg. Media Overlays. prepare this for the charter, and w3c and what should lie where

Matt: would it make sense to have an a11y community group and we don't have 1 group which discuss all of these and have 1 form for all of this instead of breaking it up.

deborah: there are things happening in other meetings which who knows what when when groups overlap in other meetings. there is such an overlap of people and meetings.

Avneesh: a CG can be easily created but will it solve the issue or create more complexity?

George: the WAI domain and the restructuring that has gone away and WAI has been integrated horizontally in all the other WG and each are now responsible for A11Y within their WG. things relavent to DPUB should be brought back to WCAG for inclusion ...

Deborah: but as you pointed out dropcap was css issue. screenreader breaking multiple spans.
... having a joint group has some appeal. Because W3C is biased epub is a good place to have a lot of influence. EPUB is biased to a specific type of publishing and … the DPUB has been great as poiting out the needs but not bringing back to the W3C to get implemented.

George: I think we need to identifying things in the WG that needs to go into WCAG generally which can be used outside of DPUB, ie metadata for website.

Avneesh: schema.org yes, ONIX no
... , a11y requirements for MO in W3C?

George: is this a DPUB area of work or WCAG area of work?

Deborah: the difference between DPUB IG research and suggestion, but WG is adding thing to recs. the Research and suggestion is IG.
... , if DPUB becomes a WG what are we doing?

George: writting specs.
... , the WG will develop a spec on rec trac books in browsers and offline mode. we don't want to hamstring backward compatibility to EPUB.

Mia: EPUB and proposed WG will intersect and there will be consistency .
... , is there a future of EPUB or is it moving to something else.

George: all the great ideas in EPUB, will move fwd into the spec, and some of the not so great portions will be replaced, but the overall notion of the WG will be a web unzipped version documents books in browsers and a service working to package this up for an offline version (maybe EPUB 4)

Mia: Ok i get it.

Avneesh: until EPUB 4 comes out EPUB 3 will continue and evolve

Deborah: question: if DPUB WG exists in charter will the charter be focused on just the next generation PWP or will it continue to focus on digital publishing issues at large? if the WG propose issues that will hurt EPUB what will happen?
... , Ivan said to make a proposal for the charter. so we have 2 choices, some group talking about DPUB needs to exist if it proposed EPUB CG? that has involved all those people who are already working on this everyone talking in a room about the same thing. But if we have a A11Y TF within the WG then you have all the legal weight being in a WG. but a11y central thing has no legal meaning. seems we should be in the WG .

George: which WG? wcag or DPUB?

Deborah: DPUB WG most of the things we brought up were not WCAG specific but DPUB needs, CSS/ARIA/UA all of these things are important.

Avneesh: do we need to propose where the A11Y TF will be, and then discuss with them how to do this.

George: comparison: in Automotive WG (making up) rec for self driving car and there is a11y requirements WhereAmI in self driving car is that something needed in WCAG that would be relavent will that stay in car space or wcag space.

Deborah: its also a UA.

Mia: its also scope outside the placement, this is automotive group but this could have implementations to other WG. and what helps determine that to other spaces outside

Charles: that is exactly what the liaison to other WG's in the charter is for, to bring issues that other WG's need to address to resolve issues relavent to DPUB.

George: for the EPUB A11Y 1.0 Spec. we had to add stuff to WCAG and we had additional stuff for Digital publications, and it seems that stuff needs to be in WCAG and those features should be brought into WCAG DPUB WG a11y TF.

Avneesh: WCAG 3.0 is very slow process, EPUB4 may be more accellerated, and WCAG 3 is still in the process and non of the issues we need will be resolved.

Deborah: because WCAG is slow nothing will change, but there is nothing we can do to elevate that?\

Avneesh: should we create an a11y profile under DPUB. and we keep moving things from the A11y profile into WCAG

Deborah: we have a profile, the expectation is WCAG would take this.

George: this sounds brilliant!

Matt: but is it allowed?
... , sounded like Ivan didn't want that work going on, or done somewhere else. if its not a rec trac document, but as soon as it becomes a specification. I don't know that we are going to get into a pull where this gets done. we would have to say that one of the products is an a11y spec and that would have to go into the Charter and approved. what kind of roadblocks will we hit.

Deborah: we made the A11Y Note but WCAG has a huge queue of things why would they pay attention to a Note.

Matt: boils down to a should/must issues this falls into WCAG is a must and to hit a level of A/AA etc.. we will ahve this a11y stuff in there with SHOULDS and wait for WCAG picks up and we can't speed up WCAG and live with what we are use to and we just put them in and work with WCAG.

Deborah: I wish Ivan was here...

Avneesh: I am not in WCAG.

<clapierre> Geoge: one from epub and DPUB into WCAG

<clapierre> Avneesh: what is our proposal and what should we draft?

<clapierre> Deborah: DPUB WG charter, section for deliverables, rec. for track deliverables, web publications, EPUB 4 and DPUB ARIA module 2.0 and

<clapierre> …, section on who we liaison with.

<clapierre> …, the DPUB WG will have an A11Y TF that guaranties that all of the normative specs and other deliverables incorporate a11y and that the normative specs requirements for a11y and we will coordinate with WCAG and ARIA CSS and web platform and have some way to move our A11y requirements to theirs.

<clapierre> George: this means that this TF will have a foot in this DPUB WG and WAI WG.

<clapierre> Avneesh: concept document and float it by Ivan/Garth. Matt what is the feasability, and the a11y snipit that ivan wrote about a11y profile.

<clapierre> deborah: we may have more stringent profile than WCAG

<clapierre> … if we were only worried about reading systems not UA, we wouldn't even worry about this and those RS would have to be conformant to them. the primary RS will be a web browser, so this means that WCAG/WAI/CSS/ARIA etc. we want them to write into their specs our more stringent requirements.

<clapierre> Avneesh: we all agree and this should be a pipe into WCAG and this is a publishers should follow, the big thing is how to make it possible.

<clapierre> Matt: we should also when we talk about things into WCAG , we need to think about technology specific sections but maybe we need to define a web publication specific technology.

<clapierre> Deborah: we have more stringent requirements but there is a pipeline, we need to be resilient to other Groups for our own modules. if we do something like this we can be aware of what other groups have other places for them.

<clapierre> Matt: when we push things to them, maybe we need to talk to them about setting up web publications as a separate technologies.

<clapierre> Avneesh: this is a good idea, we may feel some issues when we go to specific a11y needs and develop the techniques. Who can take the first crack at writing this?

<clapierre> Deborah: I can write something and circulate it.

<clapierre> Mia: I second that Deborah seems best to try to write something.

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)

Found ScribeNick: clapierre1
Inferring Scribes: clapierre1
Present: Deborah_Kaplan Avneesh Mia_Lipner George_Kershner scribe mattg
Got date from IRC log name: 09 Feb 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/02/09-DPUB-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.