Publishing Steering Committee Telco

<RickJ> https://www.w3.org/2017/04/publ-wg-charter/0524-draft.html

<George> GK: George scribing.

<ivan> scribenick: George

Charter update

IH: charter update there is an email sent out about the charter.
... It is a version that answers the issues that were submitted.
... it looks like a rewrite but it is lawyer friendly version.

IH: The objectors received the rewrite

IH: Wendy sent out an email to all that have commented; does this charter work for the commentors. They have a week to reply.
... It would then go through the W3C process.

TS: I had a call about the new draft and it seems they are OK with the rewrite.

RJ: In the deliverables section we talked about more complete vocabulary. However, we said out of scope was metadata.

IH: We would not write a new ONIX etc.

BM: TZ's reach out was approved.
... W3M seems good, Wendy will drive this process.
... Now that it has been sent to the SC, Wendy wants comments if not OK. Let's us avoide any rewrites, unless it is really essential.

TZ: New language is how agreement was reached.

RJ: Any other questions.

Final f2f agenda

RJ: Next item Garth sent out an agenda for the F2f.

GC: The agenda is in draft and not final.

RJ: the rest of the agenda was not sent out.
... update on ISO

ISO updates

BM We are getting information from ISO.

BM 3.0.1 is being prepared by Korean folks.

BM: This Korean submission complicates the process.
... Do we want to move forward with a TS.
... Let's let the ISO folks come back to us.
... Tzvia is back!
... Dr Cho was willing to do the work to update 3.0.1
... would there be valuse in a 3.0.1

AL: I thought 3.0.1 was done in support of the ISO process.
... Strange situation. I agree with George to move forward with accessibility standard and move to ISO.

RJ: What are our action items?

BM: 3.0.1 has several holes, adding collections abstraction. 3.0.1 is a meaningfull update.
... What this group is the group needs to identify the priorities. and there are several options. 3.0.1 may happen.
... The accessibility spec is what should be considered. There are different paths.

RJ: What is the timing.

BM We could be dragged into errata based on ISO review.

BM: We should decide what this groups should be done. This would provide direction to SC 34.

TS: I am confused. Are there legal requirements tied to ISO.
... what are the legal requirements on accessibility.

AL: The EU accessibility would adoption and would fall under EU mandates.

<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to ask for a clear explanation of a11y needs for ISO

AL: The EU standard would publish the accessibility mandates. We hope it would be based on existing standards. It could be ISO or W3C. The EU commission would referent these standards.

<ivan> scribenick: laudrain

Cristina: for Europe, standards have to be done by EU organization

The corean one as not receivable by EU

scribe: we have to check again, but EU has to wait for the end of the ISO level
... we would like to avoid that the EU standard is different from the exising one at international level

Tzviya: why would it be a ISO standard and not a W3C one
... W3C should be sufficient, should be checked

BM: W3C will not have an EPUB standard before years, and EPUB3 isn’t a W3C rec
... Makoto want to push accessibilty 1.0 and Dr Cho push EPUB 3.0.1

Tzivya: this question is time consuming

BM: iso for 3.0.1 brings a bias

Luc: we should clarify for Europe

Cristina: we need to do some research and bring back on what will happen

<cmussinelli> no problem...

BM: just do nothing for W3C pov

<BillMcCoy> +1 to F2F in NYC (not just for ISO though...)

RJ: meeting in New York, a SC F2F?

<BillMcCoy> I will be there Tues 21 as well as 22/23

Cristina: I may be there

<garth> Would work for me.

<BillMcCoy> Wed 21 I meant...

RJ: I’ll do a poll

<BillMcCoy> so Wed dinner is an option for me

<cmussinelli> do you have an idea on when the f22 will start?

George: moving the a11y in ISO to get more weight
... confusing is WCAG2.1 in dev on short schedule, anr WCAG3 on a longer term

RJ: George can you do a reseach on a11y side

George: ok

RJ: 2 items : Publishing summit in November and support on EPUB3. Which one ?

<BillMcCoy> suggest since we have PC for Pub Summit and we are short on time today we could just take the EPUB 3 topic... even though I suggested the other one...

epub3 is alive!

RJ: point in the thread about the subject on EPUB3
... summary of the mail thread

Tzviya: Kindle did recently things like KFX, blackbox and awfull
... People forgot what epub can do

George: sounds like mktg. We should market EPUB3 to the World and november summit is a good palce to do it
... we should have a marketing group fot that

RJ;: do we have marketing resources?

scribe: in W3C?

BM: our biggest platform is the summit
... classic marketing, like EDRlab EPUB Summit in Europe
... it is in our mental model EPUB3 is supported by W3C

Mike: EPUB3 as an ongoing viable solution
... the tranisaiton with a migration path, and EPUB3 solves a lot for publishers, so marketing all the different things it solves for publishers
... How to make it happen

Garth: a differnt format?

Like: our own format

<BillMcCoy> "just use HTML5" - is the main alternative to EPUB3 IMO (but that really means creating something one-off and not necessarily interoperable across systems)

<BillMcCoy> ... and not necessarily accessible...

Like: we are commited to EPUB3, but it’s not obvious to the executive teams what the existing EPUB brings

<Kyrce> +q

Kyrce: we didn’t address the benefit of the end user
... there may be some use we can show
... for certain user group, DRM free is high desirabilty

George: we need to agressively promote EPUB in the summit

RJ: communicating the vibrancy of the CG
... consider moving the SC to a weekly meeting, after NY F2F?