15:51:09 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dpub
15:51:09 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/24-dpub-irc
15:51:11 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:51:11 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dpub
15:51:13 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be dpub
15:51:13 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:51:14 <trackbot> Meeting: Digital Publishing Interest Group Teleconference
15:51:14 <trackbot> Date: 24 April 2017
15:51:17 <ivan> Chair: Garth
15:52:00 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2017Apr/0040.html
15:52:19 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Agenda for 2017-04-24: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2017Apr/0040.html
15:52:53 <ivan> Regrets: Alan, Karen, Heather, George, Rick, Mateus
15:55:16 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #dpub
15:56:41 <NickRuffilo> NickRuffilo has joined #dpub
15:57:30 <ivan> ??????
15:58:14 <cmaden2> cmaden2 has joined #dpub
15:58:16 <NickRuffilo> i am unable to connect to the webex
15:58:27 <NickRuffilo> have i lost track of time, or is the meeting in 2 minutes?
15:59:53 <cmaden2> The access code was rejected for me, too.
15:59:58 <ivan> It seems that cisco has removed the meeting!
16:00:17 <cmaden2> Oops.
16:00:37 <dauwhe> was the series cancelled instead of an individual recent meeting?
16:00:50 <laudrain> laudrain has joined #dpub
16:01:10 <ivan> for the time being, let us use: https://mit.webex.com/meet/iherman
16:01:28 <ivan> or access code 646 685 032
16:01:39 <ivan> I will have to sort this out for next week
16:01:44 <Vlad> Vlad has joined #dpub
16:02:59 <cmaden2> That works. Thanks, Ivan.
16:03:05 <cmaden2> present+ Chris_Maden
16:03:05 <NickRuffilo> scribenick
16:03:13 <NickRuffilo> scribenick: NickRuffilo
16:03:13 <mattg> present+ mattg
16:03:36 <clapierre> clapierre has joined #DPUB
16:03:53 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #dpub
16:04:01 <garth> garth has joined #dpub
16:04:08 <garth> Hello?
16:04:14 <ivan> present+
16:04:17 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #dpub
16:04:17 <garth> Others able to get on dialin?
16:04:21 <ivan> garth, look at your mail
16:04:24 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+ Bill_Kasdorf
16:04:33 <garth> Okay
16:04:37 <laudrain> Present+
16:04:38 <Bill_Kasdorf> the dial in isn't working
16:04:40 <ivan> charles, you too
16:04:40 <ivan> use https://mit.webex.com/meet/iherman
16:04:44 <Vlad> WebEx meeting is cancelled, all links on the IG wiki page are inactive
16:04:53 <ivan> access code 646 685 032
16:04:58 <ivan> vlad see above
16:05:03 <dauwhe> present+ dauwhe
16:05:03 <Avneesh> present+ Avneesh
16:05:10 <garth> Same dial-in number?
16:05:16 <garth> present+ garth
16:05:27 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #dpub
16:06:52 <TravisMcCrea> TravisMcCrea has joined #DPUB
16:07:43 <pkra> pkra has joined #dpub
16:07:48 <ivan> scribenick: NickRuffilo
16:07:55 <pkra> present+ Peter Krautzberger
16:08:01 <clapierre> present+ Charles_LaPierre
16:08:10 <TravisMcCrea> I know that with the charter changing there will be some differences but I wanted to point out that the WG's link for joining is locked behind a login screen
16:08:22 <Vlad> present+
16:08:40 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "Feel free to use this minute to peruse the minutes"
16:08:42 <ivan> TravisMcCrea: cisco killed the webex entry
16:08:50 <ivan> use https://mit.webex.com/meet/iherman
16:09:01 <ivan> or 646 685 032
16:09:32 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "Any objections to the minutes?  ... OK - minutes approved."
16:10:16 <TravisMcCrea> ivan I am not a DPUB IG member - I will talk after your meeting.
16:10:27 <NickRuffilo> ...: "Not sure how people have followed the charter.  There have been quite a few yes votes, but a few objections that we've been working through.  there are some proposed updates - and I'll turn it over to ivan about the status and pending changes that should be sufficient enough to not require us to re-vote."
16:11:20 <duga> duga has joined #dpub
16:11:29 <duga> present+ duga
16:11:54 <garth> From Leonnard: “Got pulled into something else in the meantime ☹.  But Adobe is all booked and we’re looking forward to hosting…”
16:12:14 <garth> q?
16:12:26 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "Lets begin with a few numbers.  At this moment, unless I missed someone - we have 20 votes in.  All are positive (accept the charter as is with or without comments).  Which is a nice number, but it has some missing things.  There are only 3 at this moment, 3 TPI members.  We should have much more than that, as the presence of the publishing industry as part of the voters is essential.
16:12:26 <NickRuffilo> Even among the regular members, we missed the votes of Pearson and Wiley - the big ones on the publishing.  We also miss the votes of a few others.  Also some members who are active/moderately active and votes would be important.  monotype, antenna house, ..."
16:12:56 <NickRuffilo> ... " And adobe.  These are all active members of this group and it would be important to have a vote in.  I will try to get to Hugh McGuire."
16:13:10 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "I just sent out a nudge to vote for the charter in email."
16:13:24 <NickRuffilo> Vlad: "I will look at it and give it attention later today>"
16:13:51 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "I have a list of members I have lobbied, and some i will.  Is there anyone from Wiley today?  Otherwise I can reach out via email."
16:15:18 <david_stroup> david_stroup has joined #dpub
16:16:03 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "That's there.  In terms of numbers, we are fine, in terms of the right spread of members, we are still waiting.  Where it becomes more complicated is that we have 2 more votes that came in a week ago that are from vivliostyle and disruptive innovations which had some objections.  We are proposing changes.  I have made a set of changes as a git-hub pull request that was done last week.  It
16:16:03 <NickRuffilo> might have been thursday, but they were mainly in response to disruptive innovations.  I think the most important thing was that the charter clearly gave the impression that it's the proto first-public-draft of what we want to do - it's a working draft and what we want to do."
16:16:10 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "Yes, it's on the agenda."
16:17:20 <ivan> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2017Apr/0017.html
16:17:37 <ivan> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2017Apr/0018.html
16:17:46 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "The other question which came up which turns into stronger issues - was the role of packaging.  Daniel was and is still strong in feeling that we should not standardize anything in packaging because similar work is going on in a different group.  I made some changes in the charter that says this recommendation may be practically empty in case another working group in the consortium creates
16:17:46 <NickRuffilo> the right document that we need.  We recieved an answer from Daniel (link above) answer (in 2nd link)."
16:18:12 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "if you have anything to add to their side of this, that would be great."
16:18:58 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "I believe you answered well.  Unless there are substantive issues against the conversation between Daniel and Ivan, we may be better off not expanding...  we're driving to a good conclusion, not turning it into an email storm is probably a feature.  "
16:21:11 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "That's true.  There may have been some mistakes somewhere.  For Vivlio style I'm not sure what's happening.  I got some notes from them but it was more of a thanks than a confirmation.  The plan is Rick Johnson and Bill will talk to him Face to face.  The impression some of us had that this issue about the role of the PWP document may be similar to what Daniel said and that the changes
16:21:11 <NickRuffilo> will also work for Florien, but we dont' know yet.  The last thing and then i stop - we also got a big strange comment from Microsoft.  MS officially abstained from the vote.  They added a comment: 'We agree with what Vivliostyle and Disruptive Innovations said.'  Which means that if we can come up with something the two like, we can go back to MS."
16:21:36 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "Ivan, assuming we're all taking happy pills, with another round or two, the plan would be to integration those changes into the charter?  "
16:21:49 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "Not today, as the day is almost over here, but maybe tomorrow.  We will see."
16:22:20 <garth> q?
16:22:21 <NickRuffilo> q?
16:23:55 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "The next piece - topic - one of the confusions/complaints was that we had a document called a PWP that was an input doc, and one that is an output document, and something that was a WP.  There was a reading of the charter where the PWP document that this group put together was the draft standards that would be output of this group.  I am not sure that was our intention, so there was a
16:23:55 <NickRuffilo> move to change the document produced by this group to be named different.  Matt made a good suggestion, but what are we proposing?"
16:24:58 <garth> q?
16:24:58 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "What I picked up - temporarily - is to say 'Web publication for the open platform: vision and technical challenges'  It works for me, and it sort of covers things.  We know we can have endless discussion on finding the right title - so we should not go into a 30 minute discussion...  Thoughts?"
16:25:10 <garth> q?
16:25:16 <clapierre> +1 on name change
16:25:34 <garth> q?
16:25:54 <cmaden2> s/Interweb/Intarweb/
16:25:57 <garth> q?
16:26:16 <dauwhe> q+
16:26:29 <NickRuffilo> Dave: "For humor, minuted suggestion: "Cromulent Meditations on the Philosophical Nature of Hypertextual Network-Enabled Interweb Pamphlets"
16:26:45 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1 to 'Web publication for the open platform: vision and technical challenges'
16:26:57 <NickRuffilo> Dave: "There was some confusion if some of the input/output documents were going to be rec-track.  There is some fine-print that they are not on rec-track."
16:27:29 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "That's one of the remaining thing on the document - is dividing the documents into different classes.  The next topic is to divide publishing and the renamed PWP document that will add notes to the interest group."
16:27:35 <garth> ack dau
16:28:04 <garth> q?
16:28:23 <garth> q?
16:28:25 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "it's exactly because of that.  I think thats what we should do - publishing them as interest group notes, which sets their status clearly - the interest group may even republish.  At the time being, it makes it clear.  I think all that should change are the title and the editorial notes that we'll make it a note."
16:28:41 <garth> q?
16:29:04 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "I think we should change the name of the PWP and publish both of them as interest group notes ASAP.  That will help move things along with the charter."
16:29:19 <garth> q?
16:30:53 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "I pasted in a comment from Leonard earlier - that everything stays in place for F2F June 22nd at Adobe in NYC.  We are well ahead on approval but we have to deal with objections.  Assuming all that goes through, we'll keep with the F2F.  Footnote 5 is the location in new york - a few blocks from NYPL.  I got from Adobe a list of hotels - I don't think we can claim the adobe rate, but if
16:30:53 <NickRuffilo> it's feasible for those hotels sooner rather than later, you might have access to better rates.  "
16:30:56 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #dpub
16:30:56 <garth> q?
16:31:16 <garth> q?
16:31:47 <garth> q?
16:32:23 <NickRuffilo> ...: "I'd like to re-iterate that if you have not voted - especially TPI members & publishing folks, if you can pester your respective organizations, that would be good.  lastly, a week from today is May 1st, which is a holiday in pieces of Europe.  We won't have an agenda for that meeting, so we will skip May 1st and come back the 8th and the charter will look even better!"
16:32:24 <garth> q?
16:32:52 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "One more thing is - I appreciate Garth's positive attitude, but keep an eye on the mailing list with the charter discussion."
16:32:53 <NickRuffilo> q+
16:33:26 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "Ideally, in two weeks, if we have the call and we're fine, that would be a great present for Tzviya."
16:33:28 <garth> ack Nick
16:34:15 <NickRuffilo> Nick: "Are there threads I need to keep up with?"
16:34:19 <garth> q?
16:34:50 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "Since the new charter thread, there are only 2 threads that have happened, and those are the responses - they were posted above in the minutes - that would be one to watch."
16:35:13 <clapierre> q+
16:35:18 <garth> q?
16:35:45 <NickRuffilo> Charles: "I thought you had to have 8 weeks after a charter was approved to have face-to-face"
16:35:51 <garth> q?
16:35:55 <garth> ack clap
16:35:59 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: "No - from when the process starts, which was 2 weeks ago."
16:36:12 <NickRuffilo> Garth: "Won't meet next week, but we'll probably email."
16:36:34 <pkra> pkra has left #dpub
16:36:39 <clapierre> clapierre has left #dpub
16:36:57 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
16:36:57 <Zakim> Present: Chris_Maden, mattg, ivan, Bill_Kasdorf, laudrain, dauwhe, Avneesh, garth, Peter, Krautzberger, Charles_LaPierre, Vlad, duga
16:37:00 <Zakim> On IRC I see laurentlemeur, duga, TravisMcCrea, rkwright, garth, Vlad, cmaden2, Zakim, RRSAgent, mattg, dauwhe, ivan, rego, Bert, plinss, JakeA, bigbluehat, iank_, astearns,
16:37:00 <Zakim> ... trackbot
16:37:08 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has left #dpub
16:37:42 <TravisMcCrea> ivan around?
16:37:47 <ivan> present+ laurent, rkwright, cmaden
16:38:03 <TravisMcCrea> Sure
16:38:14 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:38:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/24-dpub-minutes.html ivan
16:38:52 <ivan> Travis?
16:38:54 <ivan> I am here
16:39:17 <cmaden2> cmaden2 has left #dpub
16:39:24 <TravisMcCrea> ivan awesome. So I am trying to find information about getting my organization into the IG but couldn't.
16:39:37 <ivan> which organization?
16:39:55 <ivan> I mean, which is your organization:-)
16:41:56 <TravisMcCrea> We are the Kopimist Church so not at the level of Adobe (though we are a world wide organization and my branch has offices in the US and Canada), but we work closely with ebook app developers to ensure that their apps are following the EPUB standard (and OPDS standards) as well as general advocacy for digital publishing.
16:42:50 <ivan> The problem is that W3C groups are usually bound to W3C membership. That includes this Interest Group
16:43:05 <ivan> And will also include the upcoming Working Group
16:43:43 <ivan> If you have been a member of IDPF (have you?) then joining W3C at essentially the same level as IDPF is possible and that will give you the possibility to join the Working Group
16:47:36 <TravisMcCrea> So basically apply and pay the membership fee for W3C and then I apply into this?  What does the IG approval process look like? We were looking at the options of joining IDPF and Digital Publishing and I forget the reasons why but this seemed like a better use of our resources. Money is less of the issue as it is time commitments.
16:48:40 <ivan> basically yes. But some additional things: IDPF does not exist any more, because IDPF and W3C has joined forces. So there is only W3C:-)
16:49:03 <ivan> Once you have joined W3C you can join any group, including the IG, without any approval needed
16:49:12 <ivan> your membership authorizes you to join any group
16:50:05 <ivan> I do not deal with membership, though; you should contact my colleague Karen Myers karen@w3.org, and she will take care of you...
16:50:48 <TravisMcCrea> :) That's probably why we decided to come here
16:51:25 <TravisMcCrea> I know it was a discussion but it wasn't much of one that I was involved in. I will certainly do that, thanks for the information
16:52:52 <ivan> sure, you are welcome
19:11:57 <pkra> pkra has joined #dpub
19:20:40 <pkra> pkra has left #dpub
19:31:55 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dpub
20:27:45 <liam> liam has joined #dpub
23:34:28 <liam_> liam_ has joined #dpub