15:47:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwg
15:47:02 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/10/02-pwg-irc
15:47:03 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
15:47:03 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Working Group Telco
15:47:03 <ivan> Chair: tzviya
15:47:03 <ivan> Date: 2017-10-02
15:47:03 <ivan> Regrets+ laudrain
15:47:03 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2017Sep/0077.html
15:47:03 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2017-20-02: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2017Sep/0077.html
15:50:41 <jeff_xu> Hi guys, I am Jeff from Rakuten Kobo Inc. Was in this wg shortly at about two years ago but had left for a while because of some internal transfor in my company. So I am “new” to PWG will start joining meeting from this week. Nice to “see” with you guys again.
15:51:29 <dauwhe> welcome, jeff_xu!
15:51:52 <jeff_xu> Thanks :)
15:54:16 <mateus> mateus has joined #pwg
15:55:37 <cmaden2> cmaden2 has joined #pwg
15:55:55 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pwg
15:57:25 <Avneesh> present+
15:57:34 <jeff_xu> Lol
15:57:59 <leonardr> leonardr has joined #pwg
15:58:02 <leonardr> present+ Leonard
15:58:19 <jeff_xu> oh, yes I got nominated by Rauten Kobo Inc. My email address there is zheng.xu@rakuten.com
15:58:23 <jeff_xu> official one Lol
15:58:34 <ivan> present+
15:58:42 <mateus> present+
15:58:51 <baldurbjarnason> baldurbjarnason has joined #pwg
15:59:00 <baldurbjarnason> baldurbjarnason has left #pwg
15:59:06 <baldurbjarnason> baldurbjarnason has joined #pwg
15:59:08 <timCole> timCole has joined #pwg
15:59:19 <baldurbjarnason> present+
15:59:24 <cmaden2> present+ Chris_Maden
15:59:43 <clapierre> clapierre has joined #pwg
16:00:04 <timCole> present+ Tim_Cole
16:00:05 <ivan> present+ jeff_xu
16:00:09 <dauwhe> present+ dauwhe
16:00:12 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has joined #pwg
16:00:30 <rdeltour> rdeltour has joined #pwg
16:00:33 <josh> josh has joined #pwg
16:00:35 <ivan> present+ gpellegrino
16:00:35 <mattgarrish> mattgarrish has joined #pwg
16:00:36 <LillianSullam> LillianSullam has joined #pwg
16:00:41 <tzviya> present+
16:00:48 <LillianSullam> present+
16:00:52 <rdeltour> present+
16:00:52 <dkaplan3> present+
16:00:54 <ivan> present+ George
16:01:00 <josh> present+
16:01:19 <mateus> Is Chrome crashing for anyone else when loading gotomeeting?
16:01:20 <mattgarrish> present+
16:01:41 <NickRuffilo> NickRuffilo has joined #pwg
16:01:57 <NickRuffilo> scribenick: nickruffilo
16:02:08 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #pwg
16:02:19 <ivan> present+ NickRuffilo
16:02:25 <garth> garth has joined #pwg
16:02:27 <ivan> present+ leonardr
16:02:32 <NickRuffilo> i can't hear anything on gotomeeting
16:02:40 <ivan> present+ laurentlemeur
16:02:46 <josh> josh is Joshua Pyle from Atypon
16:02:50 <garth> Not here yet, but will be in 4-5 min.
16:03:05 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pwg
16:03:05 <mateus> dkaplan3 odd, I'm on macOS... trying something else.
16:03:16 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+
16:03:19 <HeatherF> HeatherF has joined #pwg
16:03:29 <marisa_demeglio> marisa_demeglio has joined #pwg
16:03:29 <Bill_Kasdorf> GTM is not connecting--did you know that already?
16:04:02 <Vlad> Vlad has joined #pwg
16:04:08 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #pwg
16:04:12 <mateus> mateus has joined #pwg
16:04:13 <HeatherF> present+ Heather_Flanagan
16:04:15 <rachel> present+
16:04:19 <bigbluehat> present+
16:04:21 <rkwright> present+
16:04:25 <mateus> present+
16:04:33 <clapierre> present+
16:05:06 <laurentlemeur> I just tried on iOS, with no issue
16:05:34 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
16:05:34 <Zakim> Present: Avneesh, Leonard, ivan, mateus, baldurbjarnason, Chris_Maden, Tim_Cole, jeff_xu, dauwhe, gpellegrino, tzviya, LillianSullam, rdeltour, dkaplan, George, josh, mattgarrish,
16:05:36 <David_Stroup> David_Stroup has joined #pwg
16:05:37 <Zakim> ... NickRuffilo, leonardr, laurentlemeur, Bill_Kasdorf, Heather_Flanagan, rachel, bigbluehat, rkwright, clapierre
16:05:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see mateus, rkwright, Vlad, marisa_demeglio, HeatherF, Bill_Kasdorf, laurentlemeur, NickRuffilo, LillianSullam, mattgarrish, josh, rdeltour, dkaplan3, clapierre, timCole,
16:05:37 <Zakim> ... baldurbjarnason, leonardr, Avneesh, cmaden2, RRSAgent, Zakim, jeff_xu, Karen, tzviya, rachel, ivan, plinss, dauwhe, jyasskin, ShaneM, astearns, github-bot-, wseltzer,
16:05:38 <Vlad> present+
16:05:40 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat
16:05:51 <laurentlemeur> from the US: +1 (312) 757-3129
16:05:55 <marisa_demeglio> present+
16:07:12 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Next week I will not be around - plus there are some holidays, should we have a meeting?
16:07:20 <leonardr> cancelling fine with me...
16:07:26 <garth> garth has joined #pwg
16:07:26 <HeatherF> OK to cancel
16:07:28 <bigbluehat> +1 to cancelling
16:07:36 <rachel> +1 to cancel
16:07:36 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1
16:07:52 <mateus> +1 to review!
16:08:13 <garth> Present+ Garth
16:08:13 <NickRuffilo> Nick: Instead of a meeting - take the time to review the documents, private reflection, and any todos/tasks you might have
16:08:14 <tzviya> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=pwg&iso=20171002T12&p1=43
16:08:37 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Review minutes from last week.  pasted above
16:08:52 <tzviya> https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2017/2017-09-25-minutes.html
16:08:54 <ivan> RESOLVED: Meeting of last week accepted
16:09:15 <ivan> Topic: lifecycle of a WPUB
16:09:17 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Minutes approved.  Next we have Matt to talk about the section we're currently in - lifecycle of a publication
16:09:19 <ReinaldoFerraz> ReinaldoFerraz has joined #pwg
16:09:28 <jeffp> jeffp has joined #pwg
16:09:36 <BenSchroeter> BenSchroeter has joined #pwg
16:09:46 <duga> duga has joined #pwg
16:09:46 <mattgarrish> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/wiki/Options-for-Processing-a-Manifest
16:09:59 <duga> present+
16:10:22 <BenSchroeter> present+
16:10:46 <NickRuffilo> Matt: What i started off doing was looking at how we might integrate with web-app manifest work.  I was trying to get something prepared.  I (pasted in wiki page) outlining some of the issues I was finding.  My personal opinion is that there is not a lot we gain from web-app manifest.  It has it's own problems it's trying to solve - installation, native/non-native...  This last week, what I was
16:10:46 <NickRuffilo> trying to do was look at what the possible lifecycle steps are - not necessarily going off web-app, but what would a user-agent need to do to intiaite a reading session...
16:10:49 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pwg
16:11:35 <jeff_xu_> jeff_xu_ has joined #pwg
16:11:42 <ivan> scribejs, set Matt Matt Garrish
16:11:56 <Hadrien> present+
16:12:08 <tzviya> q?
16:12:33 <tzviya> q+
16:12:34 <NickRuffilo> ...: I opened an issue over the weekend, and some discussion has happened there...  We don't have a specific user agent in mind, such as the web-app manifest which is focused on browsers.  There is also not any one lifecycle for a web publication.  i said this in github, if you're a browser and you've loaded a web-app manifest directly, it's different from what an ebook reading application might
16:12:34 <NickRuffilo> do with it.  There's an endless web of scenarios we'd have to flesh out if we wanted to .   What i want to do, is perhaps we don't go into this level of detail - but potentially look at the spec as Dave said in the issue - more like a data model.  What are we providing for user agents/scripts/etc....
16:12:48 <dauwhe> q+
16:13:08 <ivan> q+
16:13:53 <tzviya> q-
16:14:15 <NickRuffilo> ...: That's where I've gotten to - i think it's the most applicable and appropriate course of action.  Should we focus on the data model, and then maybe further down the line try to standardize if things come to that.  Then starting to look at more specific issues on how a browser could represent a publication.  WSo really - what are we expecting a browser to do - such as browsing context.  What
16:14:15 <NickRuffilo> would entail for a web publication to be layered on top of the existing HTML object model experience.  There are probably interesting avenues to persue instead of spending alot of time specing out a lifecycle.
16:14:17 <tzviya> ack d
16:15:57 <NickRuffilo> Dave: That sounds reasonable to me.  I'm thinking it might make sense to be orthoganal to web-app.  They want an installable experience, but after trying to work with it, I believe they're trying to solve a different problem than we are.  We should learn something about all of our struggles with this.  This starts drifting down the path of trying to describe what browsers should do, and at this
16:15:57 <NickRuffilo> point in time, I don't think we're the group to do that.  We're also somewhat lacking in implementation expertise on this, but focusing on a data model and default reading order, and resources, then we can experiment and hopefully learn something.
16:16:00 <tzviya> ack iv
16:16:27 <leonardr> q+
16:16:52 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: I noted on the issue list, but I have no problem with this approach, but I don't like the term data model.  What we're looking at is to have some sort of abstract user agent in mind, and what are the data we need to provide to let the user agent know what to do.  The data model for me means a lot of other things.
16:16:56 <tzviya> ack le
16:16:59 <NickRuffilo> +1 to Ivan
16:17:24 <tzviya> q+
16:17:46 <NickRuffilo> Leonard: Ivan, you're not wrong, we can call it whatever we want, but the idea that we're looking to describe the data - the infoset if you will - the things that the UA is going to need in order to start the process, if not proceed further down and proceed to the presentation.
16:17:47 <NickRuffilo> q+
16:17:51 <baldurbjarnason> + to Ivan (and dauwhe and Matt).
16:17:52 <tzviya> ack tz
16:18:02 <George> George has joined #pwg
16:18:32 <George> present+ George
16:18:37 <ivan> present+ David_Stroup
16:18:46 <ivan> present+ Vlad
16:18:47 <George> q+
16:18:50 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
16:19:01 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: I spent some time talking to matt, we get really bogged down in details - but we've had trouble wrapping our head on 'what are we trying to do' and we're getting dangerously close to forking HTML.  We know HTML does what it does, but perhaps in this document, we need to explain what we're doing that is unique.  Some of the things we're doing have not yet been defined by any other groups.
16:19:09 <garth> q?
16:19:10 <tzviya> ack ni
16:19:35 <ivan> present+ vagner
16:19:35 <ivan> q+
16:19:55 <NickRuffilo> Nick: What if we view it as a "package document"
16:20:00 <bigbluehat> NickRuffilo: perhaps "packaging" not "package"
16:20:07 <tzviya> ack ge
16:20:09 <ivan> "package" is also a loaded term
16:20:09 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: We don't have to get into wording right now...
16:20:11 <ivan> q-
16:20:22 <Vagner_Br> Vagner_Br has joined #pwg
16:21:08 <leonardr> q+
16:21:18 <NickRuffilo> George: Once a browser is handed a manifest and begins to process the material to provide an experience, there may be alot of different files that would have to be fetched and retrieved to build out what is initially needed.  Wouldn't it make sense that the - all that - would be preprocessed and handed to the browser so that they don't have to go through all that work?  This would also allow the
16:21:18 <NickRuffilo> author to see what exactly would be presented by the browser.
16:21:18 <garth> I do kinda like “package” — but could lead to confusion with PWP.   So, yes, +1, on wordsmith later.
16:21:34 <ivan> q+
16:21:49 <tzviya> ack le
16:21:53 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: these are important issues, but not necessarily for now...
16:21:53 <garth> ack leo
16:21:57 <tzviya> ack iv
16:22:27 <leonardr> q+
16:22:36 <dauwhe> +1 to Ivan
16:22:37 <tzviya> ack le
16:22:43 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: The pre-processing steps make me a bit concerned.  We don't want to add extra load on anyone - we want to be as close to the web as possible.
16:23:04 <NickRuffilo> Leonard: at one point we'll get there - but who drives the process.  Does the publication drive it?  The UA?  Or some combination of the two
16:23:34 <ivan> Topic: Pagination Pull Request
16:23:37 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/pull/65
16:23:44 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Next topic - we have a pull request from florien, Dave is going to attempt to speak on his behalf.
16:23:58 <ivan> s/florien/florian/
16:24:08 <dauwhe> https://s3.amazonaws.com/pr-preview/frivoal/wpub/layout-and-pagination.html#lifecycle
16:24:28 <dauwhe> https://s3.amazonaws.com/pr-preview/frivoal/wpub/layout-and-pagination.html#Layout
16:25:46 <NickRuffilo> Dave: See the #layout link.  The pull request is to start writing a section on layout and pagination of web publications.  I think I'm just going to make some quick comments.  It starts with an issue saying we need wide review - but I'm thinking that's applying to everything.  We have text saying things should be goverened by standards - and text saying we're not requesting new features...
16:28:12 <baldurbjarnason> q+
16:28:15 <NickRuffilo> ...: In general, I don't think we're in a position to say anything.  We're about to say something unprecedented - that a collection of items would be a single document - but we should start tracking what sorts of issues would come up as part of this.  Florian has some great examples of this.  What happens if subsequent resources have different reading directions?  How do counters work across pages
16:28:15 <NickRuffilo> ?  I'm hoping we can focus on that sort of thing.  There's also a comment here about specifying author preferences from an author's perspective.  We'll see how many other words we can come up with.  i don't want layout information - period - in this.  I think we're talking about how to bind together these resources.  CSS can tell how the author intends the document to be paid out, then we have
16:28:15 <NickRuffilo> personal styling based on the user's preferences, but I don't want the UA having to go through a manifest to determine that...
16:28:19 <tzviya> ack bal
16:29:04 <Vagner_Br> present+
16:29:38 <ivan> q+
16:29:50 <NickRuffilo> Baldur: I wanted to mention that I'm uncomfortable or extending/modifying CSS as it's specified normally.  The entire section on paginated layout - and the entire issue - because paginated layout within an item is unspecified. I'm talking about it in the context of a W3C spec is kind of science fiction.  The problem with pagination and styling in epub is that they're using a mode that is completely
16:29:50 <NickRuffilo> unspecified.  If we allowed that, and we said 'yes, we have UAs that are going to go implement their own thing...'
16:30:00 <Karen> Karen has joined #pwg
16:30:13 <leonardr> q+
16:30:22 <NickRuffilo> Dave: The CSS spec on pagination is just issues - there is no normative text.  We want to tread really careful here.
16:30:36 <NickRuffilo> q
16:30:36 <duga> q+
16:30:36 <NickRuffilo> q?
16:30:38 <tzviya> ack iv
16:31:44 <dauwhe> q+
16:32:17 <tzviya> ack le
16:32:17 <garth> ack leo
16:32:20 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: If i look at that section, I don't think what florian said is what you describe.  Florian is on the CSS working group.  What he says is that we may have some problems that would require us to work with the CSS working group to add one or two features in the document they are developing - which is a completely different thing.  It doesn't say that this WG will define a CSS feature.  When it
16:32:20 <NickRuffilo> says in one of the issues that page counters need to be extended - that means working with them to achieve that.  That's fine - we're expected to identify the features that need to be extended.  The whole section is 1,2,3,4 open issues.
16:32:40 <NickRuffilo> Leonard:  Process question - i've been adding comments to the pull request - do you want to review here?  Or just continue in the pull request?
16:32:42 <duga> q-
16:33:58 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: What I propose to do - if we find the pull request is acceptable - is to merge the pull request, then probably tomorrow, turn the issues into proper github issues so that it would be part of our discussions - then they become usual issues which we can put in comments.  The reason why I prefer we do it that way is that we have to recognize that florian did this pull request as a guest - I
16:33:58 <NickRuffilo> don't expect him to regularly go through things.
16:34:46 <NickRuffilo> leonard: my concern from the other side is that we're trying to get a document out within the next 4 weeks.  I worry - I find a few very clear things we as a group don't agree on or are problematic.  I worry that if we put out a document with some of these things in it, it might create issues.  I worry about using the normal process on that.
16:34:53 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: And we can change the text between then.
16:34:55 <tzviya> q?
16:34:57 <NickRuffilo> q?
16:34:59 <tzviya> ack da
16:35:20 <NickRuffilo> Dave: My opinion is that I'd do significant editing of the pull request before merging it.
16:35:31 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: But will it happen - do we have the time/energy to do that?
16:35:34 <NickRuffilo> Dave: Yes, I think so.
16:35:42 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: Ok, then, we wait.
16:36:10 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: So the proposal is to edit it, then merge it.  Dave can you do this before then?
16:36:40 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: Just to speed things up, I propose that Dave makes the editing after it's merged...  Lets not wait the two weeks.
16:36:46 <tzviya> q?
16:37:11 <NickRuffilo> Garth: Dave - is there any overview of the editing you want to do - something to run by us?
16:37:37 <ivan> q+
16:38:16 <NickRuffilo> Dave: I think one thing is that most of the notes do not add alot - things like having a list of existing of CSS specs, I'm not sure thats the kind of thing we need to have.  I think this could be half as long with the same information.  That's one thing.
16:38:18 <tzviya> ack iv
16:38:36 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: Very technical comment - I'm not sure how to solve this - but florian did the editing on the fork of the repo, not the repo itself...
16:38:53 <ivan> RESOLVED: dauwhe will do some editing on the pull request and merge it then
16:38:58 <ivan> Topic: new members
16:39:56 <NickRuffilo> (missed name): I work as a software engineer in accessibilty.  I do research and development in accessibility.  We've certified over 17,000 epubs in italy and we are working on making them better and better
16:40:13 <ivan> s/(missed name)/gpellegrino/
16:40:28 <NickRuffilo> ...:  I was in the epub 3 working group, but this is my first time in the working group
16:40:34 <ivan> Topic: Security section
16:40:43 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Moving on, we have Leonard on Security section
16:41:15 <ivan> q+
16:41:17 <NickRuffilo> Leonard: Not done, but I have made progress.  It is coming along, I'll have it ready before next week.  Other things have come up.  I apologize.
16:41:20 <tzviya> ack iv
16:42:29 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: I have a question - Were you around when we had the presentation on the web packaging items.  One thing that was very promenant was not exclusively security - but was the integrety issue - using signatures over signatures to make sure that the document - such as a legal document - has been unchanged.  Is this something you'd be interested in addressing?  We were wondering if it might make
16:42:29 <NickRuffilo> sense as Security and Integrity.
16:42:51 <tzviya> q?
16:42:53 <Hadrien> q+
16:43:06 <NickRuffilo> Leonard: This is on WEB publications - so what's different between a web publication and the web itself.  We don't want to change the web security model.  especially on the packaging - things will come up in the PWP document.
16:43:17 <baldurbjarnason> q+
16:43:40 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: I don't agree.  As a web publication, if i put up legal text or a scholarly article, i want to make sure that the content has not been changed since it's creation.  For packaged, it's there...
16:44:25 <NickRuffilo> Leonard: Here's how I see the difference.  A web publication - the author controls.  They are the ones who had to put it on the web - it's not distributed outside of the standard web.  I don't think we have to worry about that in terms of web publication.  When it comes to portability - and items off the web - then I agree 100%.
16:44:58 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: In the browser section of the HTML , there is a ton of information on security.  Leonard - here's my question - do you need help from others in this group?
16:45:05 <tzviya> https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/single-page.html#browsers
16:45:06 <NickRuffilo> Leondard: Not to get the first draft, but afterwards, yes.
16:45:17 <garth> q?
16:45:21 <tzviya> q?
16:45:25 <tzviya> ack had
16:45:25 <garth> ack Ha
16:46:02 <ivan> +1 to Hadrien
16:46:21 <NickRuffilo> Hadrien: I just wanted to say that this is really tied to packaging.  As long as we have to offline these web publications, we'll deal with these issues.  The top reason things are signed is that the implemenation is that the service worker will be sending an HTTP request on behalf of a server - which is why you need to use HTTPS.  That's not just for PWP - it's something we'll have to deal with
16:46:21 <NickRuffilo> all the time.
16:46:24 <tzviya> ack bald
16:46:40 <ivan> q+
16:47:17 <Bill_Kasdorf> s/really tied/not really tied
16:47:30 <tzviya> ack iv
16:47:31 <leonardr> q+
16:47:33 <NickRuffilo> Baldur: I wanted to express the concern that the feature ivan mentioned is a web feature, not just publications.  it's very risky adding - like protecting a resource - it's a web issue, not necessarily just to publications.  this affects tons of work - but it's general purpose features - and i want to make sure that we are not trying to define these sorts of features.
16:48:45 <baldurbjarnason> q+
16:49:05 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: Risky it is, and probably doing it by ourselves is not the way to go, but lets not forget that this group does 2 things.  1 - it identifies those things that publications really really need, then it separates those things it has to define by itself or by other groups.  It's our job to talk to other groups when necessary.  Same thing i said about CSS applies here.  The integrity aspect might
16:49:05 <NickRuffilo> be more important than for other areas - so it is an area that comes up with use cases - a legal text is an obvious example.  Yes, we should not do it ourselves, we should talk to web security, but we have to identify it.
16:49:10 <garth> q?
16:49:31 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Unless it's urgent, can we table - we have more to talk about
16:49:46 <tzviya> ack ba
16:50:15 <NickRuffilo> Baldur: I think ivan underestimates the disfunction of the technical side of the publishing industry and be careful not to suggest things that will be taken and run with...  We need to treat this industry like a misbehaving child.
16:50:30 <tzviya> topic: TPAC Agenda
16:50:33 <tzviya> https://docs.google.com/document/d/12J3Y3bb5fdPh1r2XH9YloINkNSxBJArocKY108sYCZ0/edit?usp=sharing
16:50:46 <ivan> regrets+ luc, pkra
16:51:03 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: If you are attending TPAC, we'd love to see you, if you're not attending, we will miss you.  If you propose a session, we tried to squeeze it in.
16:51:04 <NickRuffilo> q+
16:51:13 <ivan> Topic: TPAC
16:52:02 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: The other sessions are things we think will affect us later on.  There is our rough agenda.  We are open to recommendations for change - there is one note here from garth in relation to user agents - we weren't sure we needed 90 minutes - but we might...
16:52:18 <tzviya> ack lr
16:52:22 <tzviya> ack ni
16:52:30 <tzviya> ack le
16:52:42 <NickRuffilo> Nick: Is there a dial in?
16:52:54 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: YES - if you are calling in, please note in the document if you are calling in
16:53:04 <ivan> Topic: F2F
16:53:45 <leonardr> what are the may dates?
16:54:00 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: The issue for the face to face is that we'll need a meeting for springtime.  We have not found the ideal solution.  There is an AC meeting in Berlin in May - and some of us will be there.  However, the same week Lorent also wants to have the epub summit.
16:54:23 <tzviya> AC Meeting is 13-15 May
16:54:40 <tzviya> s/Lorent/Laurent
16:55:38 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: We have to have the face-to-face separated from that week - so when and where.  One idea that did come up - in April, there is the London Book Fair - which means several people will be in London.  One idea is to combine it with the LBF - either in London or somewhere else nearby.  it's probably more expensive than NY.
16:55:46 <leonardr> April 10-12 for LBF
16:56:08 <tzviya> Passover ends April 7
16:56:22 <leonardr> and the week afterwards is ISO meetings for PDF
16:56:24 <dauwhe> I'll be in Berlin April 10-12 for CSSWG
16:56:53 <laurentlemeur> EDRLab can host the meeting in Paris also. London / Paris is a 2 h trip.
16:57:04 <garth> And TPAC is Lyon (way later in the year)
16:58:13 <NickRuffilo> ...: I think the idea was to have the event either right after or before the fair.  One possibility is London, the other is to have it in Nice.  Obviously that means for North Americans and Brazilians, that might mean coming over to the F2F then coming over to Berlin for the AC meeting/Epub summit - twice the trip.  If we have it in North America - I have already found some possible dates at MIT
16:58:13 <NickRuffilo> - but then that means we have a F2F meeting 3 times in a row in NA, which is a drag on Europeans.  This are about the changes, and so one possibility is either april - the week of the 10th, in Europe.  Paris is an option (as it's not far from London).  The MIT possible date is towards the end of May.  As usual we have to decide this relatively quickly.  Places are getting full, we have to find
16:58:14 <NickRuffilo> meeting places...
16:58:31 <Bill_Kasdorf> April adjacent to LBF would work best for me
16:58:32 <HeatherF> Would a doodle poll with the options listed out in one place be useful?
16:58:35 <baldurbjarnason> Meetings in the USA are also problematic in terms of ability to attend. Some of us face a small but non-zero risk of being denied entry. So, if we can avoid US meetings that’d be appreciated.
16:58:45 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: There is also the possiblity of Canada...
16:59:02 <baldurbjarnason> (Make that very uneasy about travelling to the US)
16:59:20 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: Yes, it might be easier for Europeans and Americans...
16:59:21 <garth> I like London.  :-)
16:59:22 <jeff_xu> Welcome to Toronto
16:59:33 <NickRuffilo> Dave: There are publishing companies in Toronto
16:59:33 <Bill_Kasdorf> I like the London or Paris options
17:00:37 <NickRuffilo> Ivan: I'll work on an initial doodle poll
17:00:39 <HeatherF> thx!
17:00:51 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has left #pwg
17:00:56 <mateus> Thanks all
17:00:59 <NickRuffilo> Tzviya: Ok - next meeting in 2 weeks.
17:01:02 <cmaden2> cmaden2 has left #pwg
17:01:07 <dauwhe> dauwhe has joined #pwg
17:01:19 <jeff_xu> jeff_xu has left #pwg
17:01:33 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:01:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/10/02-pwg-minutes.html ivan
17:01:40 <ivan> zakim, bye
17:01:40 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Avneesh, Leonard, ivan, mateus, baldurbjarnason, Chris_Maden, Tim_Cole, jeff_xu, dauwhe, gpellegrino, tzviya, LillianSullam,
17:01:40 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwg
17:01:43 <Zakim> ... rdeltour, dkaplan, George, josh, mattgarrish, NickRuffilo, leonardr, laurentlemeur, Bill_Kasdorf, Heather_Flanagan, rachel, bigbluehat, rkwright, clapierre, Vlad,
17:01:43 <Zakim> ... marisa_demeglio, Garth, duga, BenSchroeter, Hadrien, David_Stroup, vagner, Vagner_Br
17:01:51 <dkaplan3_> dkaplan3_ has joined #pwg
17:01:52 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
17:01:52 <RRSAgent> I see no action items