Publishing Business Group Telco

28 Mar 2017

See also: IRC log


Ivan Herman, Leslie Hulse, Bill Kasdorf, Cristina Mussinelli, Daihei Shiohama, Daniel Bennett, Graham Bell, Hadrien Gardeur, Jens Klingelhöfer,Julian Calderazi, Junichi Yoshii, kainteese, Liisa McCloy-Kelley, Lauren Le Meur, Luc Audrain, Matt Garrish, Mike Baker, Mateus Teixeira, Paul Belfonta, Rick Johnson, Avneesh Singh, George Kerschner,
Kare Myers, Bill McCoy, Vagner Diniz
George, laudrain


  1. Status of the charter
    1. Issue 24: goal section & terminology
    2. Issue 15: DRM
    3. Issue 36, I18N questions
    4. Misc other issues
  2. Repo setup for the BG
  3. External contacts

RJ: Thank you for joining our call. as was relayed in email from BM, we will hold this time for steering committee or the pbg. Our next call is in two weeks.

<Rick_Johnson> https://www.w3.org/2017/03/13-pbg-minutes.html

RJ: Minutes are linked in irc. Any comments? If no we will assume the mintes are approved.
... Move as close as possible to the charter being as close to possible.

<ivan> charter issue list: https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/issues

L: in the minutes from London. I want to know if there was a decision about Pierre position.

Luke: the recommendation was to make a recommendation.

RJ: George was going to reach out to Hachette

Luc send to Luke Orrayan the AC rep. George will send the message to luke.

Status of the charter

IH: working group charter we are working on. There are issues 15 and 24 that are tricky.

Issue 24: goal section & terminology

... Take 24 first. Came in a critique of goals and scope section. Discussion took place yesterday. The main issue is that it is too general withourt defining. IH agrees with the proposal.

<ivan> https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/issues/24#issuecomment-289726627

IH: I cam up with a shorter more concise of text. I'll put it here.
... I have not received an answer from the commentor. It would be good if the rest of you could comment. We want to close this. It is the replacement text for the whole goals section.

RJ: two inherent items within 24.

IH: therm web publication for that one my opinion is to keep what we have.
... The interest group has spent a lot of time getting to the term we have today..
... Nothing stopping us from changing the term later in the process. So let's not do anything.

RJ: Echo Matt that we could spend a lot of time of naming. The main job is birth and launching and not worry about the name.

BK: Comment, using the word publication aligns with the rest of language at W3c.

Paul: We do not want to be side tracked by items that come in.

IH. We have agreement.

IH: I would also like comments on the goals section.
... Put comments on the issues list, thursday at the latest.
... I travel on Friday to OZ and if we want to get this going, it would be best to finish it up before I leave.
... Thursday is the natural deadline.

RJ: I will be happy to comment in that time line. We want to close this up b4 you leave.

BK: Is concensus the lack of objection? I suggest that an email to the list that states speak up by Thursday.

IH: It would be proper to clean up the minutes and include the decisions. One of the chairs can emphasize in a follow up email that

GK: can somebody copy names from the webx into the irc?

Issue 15: DRM

IH: for those that did not follow the text that cam in a long time ago has said these things are out of scope. Including DRM.
... There was text that says howver, the WG will not do anything to make DRM impossible. There is an objection against this.

<ivan> https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/issues/15#issuecomment-288635115

IH: Two folks did not like this and we tried to come up with text that would be more suitable and we think we are at a spot where the test works.
... I posted the text.
... a few hour ago David commented and still against it and he gives an arguement. This made me think and in the way we wrote it. On one side there we will do everything to kill DRM on the web and the other camp is to enable DRM on the web.
... My proposal is to cut back everything Keep the sentence is that DRM is out of scope and no other statements around this. We can expect the working group to do the right thing.

<laudrain> I’ll try

<ivan> scribenick: laudrain

BK: charter is for web pub, some profile could introduce that concept

<George> BK:Hadrien comments are relevant. this means that some profile could not introduce something. So IH rec is good.

LLM: for Web Pub, no issue

For profile there would be a need in the package to express which DRM is used, in a standard way

<George> Laurent: For EPUB 4 there would need to be some information about DRM and there must be some way to find out the way the DRM is implemented in EPUB 4.

Only a hook

<George> IH: We don't have the final tech solution, so speaking from the top of my head.

Ivan: no final tech solution but there will be some sort of manifest in WP and EPUB4

We will standardize the format of that manifest something like that

<George> IH: we know there must be some text and in the package which is a key value pairs. We will standardize a number of things that need to be in the package

<George> IH: if the manifest is extensible, for education purposes then an external reference to DRM can be implemented, but it will not officially be a specification of DRM, so it is not in scope of the charter.

<Hadrien> not having a standard extension point for encryption would be problematic, not just for DRM

<George> IH: we cannot say that the manifext cannot be extended. By the way, the EPUB 3.1 has one hook and it is not specified.

<Hadrien> it's also needed for font obfuscation in EPUB

<George> GB: One way to clarify is to say that DRM is out of scope, for the avoidance of doubt, the wg would make no specs that prevents or requires the implementation.

<George> Thank you very much

Ivan: not sure that’s necessary

To be clear what I propose is the same as Moz proposed originally

Graham: What out of scope means?

clarification needed

Ivan: Graham would you try to answer to the issue?

Graham: I’ll try

Hadrien: needs some sort of extension point about encryption

Font obfuscation for instance

some standard extension point is need more generic

Ivan agrees

George: Expression in document for libraries for document time out, but just a RS flag

Ivan: in any case, extension point is needed

Rick: any other comment?

Non more comment

Ivan: comment on 24, and Graham on 15, and we will see

Rick: Graham about what « out of scope » means

BiilK: works for me

BillK: an EPUB would be more restrictive than WP, but DRM comes from the supply chain, not publishers

Graham: the requirement to do so may come from the publisher

Issue 36, I18N questions

Ivan: issue 36, closed, comments from Murata Makoto for more explanation

Issue reopen with an answer

Please look and comment if necessary

Misc other issues

Issue about latinreq still open

Does anyone can look at it?

somebody has a right reference for BFF?

Hadrien, :

nothing stable, asides from Dave repo

wait for Dave

Ivan: to be modified later

Rick: about the external document?

Repo setup for the BG

Ivan: organization of the BG

a document why EPUB4 is necessary

This document from BillK it is referenced in the charter

It is not part of the charter. There should be an area on the WWW for that doc to be hosted

Create a separate github repository for that kind of document?

happy to setup that repository

Rick: as BG move forward, there may be more doc that need a home

<George> George agrees with a github repo

Liisa: another repository would be fine for doc that group may produce

<pbelfanti> +1 to stated comments

I agree

Rick: closing the other issues?

Near final charter before living?

External contacts

Ivan: yes if no other new issue comes

<michaelbaker> I have not been able to get the MS it on the calendar yet.

contact with people at Apple, and Garth from Google : may come later

Rick: we are on the time line

George: with Apple, I would need to know what is the proper approach?

Ivan: to ask them to review the charter, if they can live with it or they see any problem

It’s better to hear now if they have any issue

we have 3-4 weeks to handle issues

<scribe> ACTION: George to join Apple people [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/28-pbg-minutes.html#action01]

Michael: what is the procedure?

Ivan: do the samle as I told George

We would deal with a call if needed

Michael: I will share the charter

<scribe> ACTION: Michael to share the charter with MS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/28-pbg-minutes.html#action02]

Ivan: practicla thing : member of the Steering Committe send their github account bt mail

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: George to join Apple people [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/28-pbg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Michael to share the charter with MS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/28-pbg-minutes.html#action02]

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/03/29 07:06:57 $