Date: 2018-01-30
See also the Agenda and the IRC Log
Present: George Kerscher, Luc Audrain, Wolfgang Schindler, Avneesh Singh, Mateus Teixeira, Rachel Comerford, Tzviya Siegman, Dave Cramer, Ivan Herman, Ric Wright, Karen Myers, Bill Kasdorf, Garth Conboy, Liisa McCloy-Kelley, Cristina Mussinelli, Dan Sanicola, Juli Calderazi, Brian O'Leary
Regrets: Junko Kamata
Guests:
Chair: Liisa McCloy-Kelley
Scribe(s): Karen Myers, Rachel Comerford
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: let’s get started
… by talking about the new business group task forces
… Link here
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jpw0KA9StAnWZAaIMqnITmdSOchIZeQIvphX5AmAulg/edit
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: it was suggested last week that we
edit this document to put these TFs in a different order
… order by what we are going to do; how we are going to do it
… we made space in this document for members to start signing up
… our suggestion that we continue to have people email the entire BG with
the TF work
… but actually use the email tag on these emails
… how do people feel about that?
Wolfgang Schindler: sounds good to have these emails
… to all of us so we are informed what is going on
Rachel Comerford: +1 to the email plan
Wolfgang Schindler: and to quickly filter out what is interesting to us
Cristina Mussinelli: we can volunteer and put our name in the list?
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: yes, please; put your name on the list
Karen Myers: you may also want to consider a conference call or short webinar about onboarding folks into what BG and the task forces are doing and how to particpate/engage
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: thanks for that feedback; I’ll take
that back to the co-chairs
… please put your last names in; will do that with the group leads as well
… Let’s talk about proposal for the new PBG Steering Committee
… we talked about the PBG SC becoming an oversight body for the various
groups
… some of these may not be long-lived
… or others working on the work somewhere else, or within W3C generally
… did not want people to feel that they had to join the SC
… proposal was on the invite you received for this meeting
… has everyone had a chance to review this?
… is this an acceptable process and good to get people off the ground?
Bill McCoy: may I offer a procedural comment?
… We are not proposing to change the charter of the BG
… even though we are changing the SC to be a slate this group elects
… we want to leave charter as is; this is part experiment
… and part of IDPF and W3C agreement and in the TPI period to keep things
within that
… it’s electing a SC but co-chairs have put forth a slate
… but it does not rule out someone else who wants to run
… maybe next we change the committee so that the SC becomes a coordination
group and not elected
… but we are not proposing that right now
… wanted to cover and make it clear it’s an election
… because we are not changing the charter
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: thank you, Bill
… no one is on the queue; any thoughts here?
Bill Kasdorf: I can move to elect the slate
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: anyone want to second that?
Garth Conboy: BillK made the motion and I am happy to second
Bill McCoy: I think that people on the slate should not make the motions
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Anyone not on the slate want to make a motion?
Tzviya Siegman: I’m on the slate
… not to be picky; but I think that votes are a call for consensus at W3C
… that’s how things work
Garth Conboy: is that required for BG
Karen Myers: this is different from usual W3C process
… I defer to Bill
Bill McCoy: I checked about this
… we can do irc to accept the whole slate
… or if co-chairs want to extend this beyond this meeting by email
… and you have 72 hours
… to respond
… and ask for +1’s and 0’s but not really counting
Karen Myers: ..BG can hold the election any way it wants to
Avneesh Singh: election should not be confined to only this call
Dave Cramer: I would strongly encourage us not to decide
this during the meeting
… if someone who was busy today, they should have their say
Luc Audrain: +1
Tzviya Siegman: +1 to dauwhe
Dave Cramer: I don’t want to disenfranchise the Far East due to time of day
Bill McCoy: +1 to Dave’s proposal for 72h email call for consensus on slate as our election process
Bill Kasdorf: +1 to dauwhe
Mateus Teixeira: +1
Ivan Herman: +1
George Kerscher: Agree with Dave
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: so proposal is to put this slate out via email today
Wolfgang Schindler: +1 to Dave’s proposal
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: give people 72 hours to put slate
out
… and respond with a +1 or -1 to the slate
Bill McCoy: or 0
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: true
… to respond as they see fit to gather consensus
Ivan Herman: +1
Luc Audrain: +1
Tzviya Siegman: +1
Wolfgang Schindler: +1
Mateus Teixeira: +1
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: everyone agreed to move forward in
that manner
… that is what we will do
… Bill, do you want to talk about announcement about Digital Publishing
Summit Europe
Bill McCoy: is Laurent on the call? Prefer he does it
… I failed to coordinate
Bill McCoy: https://www.edrlab.org/dpub-summit-2018/
Bill McCoy: Here is the link to an event that has just
been posted for registration that W3C is supporting
… May 16-17 in Berlin
… just after the AC meeting in Berlin
… W3C has two annual meetings, TPAC in Fall and AC meeting, including TPI
representatives, in the spring
… includes BG members here
… EDRLab is organizing a follow-on to last year’s Summit this spring
… you can buy a ticket now
… you can inquire if you want to sponsor
… W3C will have an active role with sessions and speakers
… Ivan, you have been involved in program development
Ivan Herman: Not too much more to add
… we just had a telco and hour ago with BillK, Cristina and I and Laurent
… there is a session that we do plan which would have direct W3C
… in the sense of talking about what we do in Publishing@W3C
… still talking about if we present the specific work or the activity as a
whole
… I think the latter will prevail
… session is 90 minutes
… we are also considering session from the archival community
… and a separate presentation on scholarly publishing
… the rest is still shaping up; still too early to go public with the
program
… you should all be there!
Bill McCoy: I encourage everyone to sign up
… you can suggest yourself or others as speaker and help to shape the
program
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: We want to talk about funding approach for EPUB Check
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Tzviya, can you say more about this?
Tzviya Siegman: Sure. You probably heard me talk about
lack of developers working on EPUB Check
… there have been some volunteers
… Tobias Fisher and Romain
… Romain working more on accessibility checking tool
… yeah
… but we are out of developers
… We’ve been thinking about how to engage more developers
… not a lot of people out there
… even if we found that, we need someone who could act as technical
leader, like the CTO of EPUB Check
… and we would need to pay
… and we are now looking for funds
… and we would look at spec and overall the site
… and it’s a challenging process of under documented code
Bill Kasdorf: we are talking about an immediate but
limited engagement for this CTO
… or are we envisioning that this person continues to be in charge of the
development of EPUB Check
… is it a one-time activity or an on-going need?
Tzviya Siegman: not a one-time, it’s a short-term
commitment
… and we would need to figure out how long that commitment would be
… Liisa suggested we talk about raising funds for the initial development
to support EPUB Check; and then a second phase longer commitment to
support code
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Co-chairs of three groups met
Friday
… there is immediate need
… once we have EPUB Roadmap
… need to determine current version
… and then we need to have EPUB Check work with that version
… then there is the longer-term need to rethink how the tools work
… and make it easier to maintain the tools over time
… the cost approximately is about $50K for the first phase
… and possibly $100-150K for the whole thing
… those are very rough numbers
… back of the envelope math that Bill gave us on Friday
… if we are asking for money, let’s give people some idea of what we need
to raise
Bill Kasdorf: no
George Kerscher: I think this community needs to oversee
that development
… people, organizations who committed long-term in the game
… Romain is great and understands the need
… if we could have a couple like him oversee the activity like him
… and bring in a nose-down coder to work under his/their guidance
… so once that nose-down coder goes away, we still have people who have
enough knowledge of system to keep it moving forever
Bill Kasdorf: +1 to George
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Bill McCoy
Bill McCoy: I agree with George
… in the past, there was a rotating group of organizations that supported
the development and management of EPUB Checker
Karen Myers: [Bill names the companies]
Bill McCoy: four different custodians of EPUB Check
along the years
… would be ideal if we solve this for the oversight and funding
… if we de-couple these which we did not do before
… and TF in BG helps to provide the oversight and guidance
… Don’t worry about who is collecting the funds
… whether W3C, or Readium, or DAISY, we will work that out
… we are concerned with finding the funds
… and then we can figure out how to take the money
Tzviya Siegman: I agree with what Bill just said
… managing a project this size, a revolving door of project managers and
coders causes problems
… we really need someone who can make decisions
Dave Cramer: the community depends upon EPUB Check
… very large companies…some have very large amounts [names dollars] in the
bank
… those are the organizations that should be funding this, so how do we
make that happen?
Luc Audrain: Just following Dave
… I have ask explicitly to Microsoft for funding EPUB Check
… I met them in San Francisco
… I explained first thing they consider is to look after EPUB Check needs
and resources
… I have not gotten any answer yet
Rachel Comerford: It would be easier to approach team if
they could contribute funds if I had a proposal to give to them
… lays out what we plan to do, why we are asking
… does something like that exist?
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: not yet
… anyone else feel that would be helpful?
Tzviya Siegman: +1 to rachel’s suggestion
Dave Cramer: absolutely
Karen Myers: +1
Brian O’Leary: +1
Dave Cramer: we need some kind of prospectus to say way
Wolfgang Schindler: +1
Dave Cramer: and what type of sponsorship credit for doing so
Bill McCoy: when Readium was developing DRM, we went
around to stakeholders for interest
… and we essentially told them we will invoice you and earmark funds for
developing the spec
… and give you a seat at the table
… that SC did not turn out to be very effective
… worked pretty well
… got 8-10 companies sufficient to fund
… a pattern we used at Readium Foundation
… could be used here; supports what Tviya is saying
… a minimum of X dollars
Dave Cramer: scribnick: dauwhe
Dave Cramer: liisamk_: do we have data on who uses epubcheck?
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: Is there anyway to know how many people have downloaded it or how often it’s used?
Karen Myers: https://www.w3.org/International/sponsorship/
Tzviya Siegman: it might be possible to know who’s using the website but we should ask Romain if there are any other analytics availabel
Karen Myers: Liisa; If we start a Google doc, could we make a list of people who might be willing to contribute
Karen Myers: I just dropped in i18n sponsor program; BillM, you may want to talk with Alan Bird. Could be a prototype
Ric Wright: no real tracking of EPUB Checker
… would have to be planned along with management tracks
… and depends if people want to be tracked or avoid being tracked
Luc Audrain: I think it would be good to have a Google
doc where we can declare
… where we can track the issues
… for users, distributors using EPUB
… as publishers I have to say we never send any EPUB that was not checked
by EPUB Check, starting in 2009
… we still do it now
… any EPUB we receive from our suppliers or production dept. is checked
through EPUB Check
… we have used EPUB Check in all its versions as soon as new versions were
available
… that is the use we have
… several ten thousand
… more than 50K EPUBs for our group that we are distributing
… that’s an idea of the size
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: BillK
Bill Kasdorf: many aggregators won’t proceed without running EPUB Check
Juli Calderazi: I totally agree with Bill K.
Bill Kasdorf: Ingram, GooglePlay, could give aggregate numbers that cross multiple publishers
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: I think first step is effort to collect names of people we know
Bill Kasdorf: people who are receiving EPUBs
… we receive x million per year that have EPUB Check, from hundreds or
thousands of publishers
… rather than a few publishers who use it
… don’t disagree that that is ok
… but people receiving EPUB is the place to look
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: I agree; make lists of everybody
… retailers, distributors, publishers
… helps to prioritize where we go
… anything else to say on the EPUB Check funding?
… before moving on to frequency and timing of meetings
Cristina Mussinelli: I was thinking about the people
… more than the funding
… Brunelli
… has possible knowledge, no idea if he has interest
… I could pass along his info to Tzviya if you think that would be useful
Tzviya Siegman: Rachel’s idea is good
Bill Kasdorf: To clarify, I was suggesting getting those large aggregate numbers not to recruit specific sponsors but to make the case in the sponsorship document for how important it is.
Tzviya Siegman: for a prospectus
… is it too soon?
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: good idea, but should also be linked to the roadmap
Tzviya Siegman: ok, I’m happy to help with that when we are ready
Brian O’Leary: I was going to suggest with respect to
list you want to compile
… we are doing an effort on ONIX 3
… we have created a map of users; I can share that list if you think it
would be of value
Dave Cramer: why doesn’t W3C take over EPUB Check the way it does the validator
Dave Cramer: https://validator.w3.org
Bill McCoy: I can respond
… that is not out of the question
… but at the moment there is a chicken and the egg problem
… the TPI and full member numbers are lower
… so there is a lack of funding
… before DAISY did the heavy lifting, thank you, George
… the HTML validator was provided by donated development
… the checker uses the HTML5 validator; a more complicated problem
… not completely out of question, but we would need kick-start funding
… and maybe split the baby to have W3C actively manage it
… but W3C does not have the funds
Dave Cramer: or have someone sponsor someone as a W3C Fellow
Ivan Herman: +1 to what BillM said: W3C could manage it but not develop it…
Bill McCoy: yes, that is in scope
… there is a W3C program for Fellow; requires 50% of someone’s time
… W3C is not averse to doing projects in the ecosystem it is serving and
that falls into this bucket
… that is another option
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: there is question of time frame for
this call
… how do people feel about this?
… continue bi-weekly on this time slot?
Wolfgang Schindler: +1
Tzviya Siegman: +1
Ric Wright: +1
Mateus Teixeira: +1
George Kerscher: is this the whole Publishing BG or the Steering Committee?
Rachel Comerford: +1 on PBG time slot
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: this is the Publishing BG time slot
Bill Kasdorf: +1 on biweekly meeting
Garth Conboy: as a standing meeting, that makes sense
… but we should have an agenda out beforehand
… and if it’s empty day beforehand, we cancel
Tzviya Siegman: +1 Garth
Mateus Teixeira: +1 to garth
Dave Cramer: karen: this doesn’t work for Asia and Australia
Dave Cramer: … unless there are task forces
Karen Myers: this time is a barrier for Asia
Dave Cramer: CSS has this problem
… first call is done at Australia friendly time
… and that has worked fairly well
… it gives everyone to get in
… and we adjust agendas based on who is likely to be on the call
Ric Wright: EPUB WG used to do this as well
Rachel Comerford: +1
Ric Wright: +1
Mateus Teixeira: +1
Bill Kasdorf: +1
Garth Conboy: +1
Wolfgang Schindler: -1
Ivan Herman: +1, let us try it
Dave Cramer: +1
Brian O’Leary: +1
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: how do people feel about first call
of month is at noon ET and second call of month is 7:00pm ET
… can people +1 in irc
George Kerscher: +1
Luc Audrain: that is very late for Europe
Bill McCoy: maybe we should ask feedback from all members in email, not just those who were here at this time today (ipso facto those for whom this time was bad aren’t likely to be on this call)
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: so why don’t we try that
… and we will get invites updated
… Ivan and Luc get a vacation; we’ll try to schedule the agendas
accordingly
… anybody have anything else for today?
Brian O’Leary: good meeting
Liisa McCloy-Kelley: ok, giving you back 7 minutes of
your day
… thank you everyone for participating
… we will get the SC slate out by email
Ric Wright: bye!