16:03:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pbg
16:03:42 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/02/13-pbg-irc
16:03:43 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
16:03:43 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Business Group Telco
16:03:43 <ivan> Chair: liisa
16:03:43 <ivan> Date: 2018-02-13
16:03:43 <ivan> Regrets+ pbelfanti
16:03:43 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishingbg/2018Feb/0030.html
16:03:43 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2018-02-13: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishingbg/2018Feb/0030.html
16:14:38 <Julian_Calderazi> Julian_Calderazi has joined #PBG
16:50:48 <wolfgang> wolfgang has joined #pbg
16:51:36 <jyoshii> jyoshii has joined #pbg
16:53:58 <George> George has joined #pbg
16:56:23 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pbg
16:58:21 <Brian> Brian has joined #pbg
17:00:21 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #pbg
17:00:33 <liisamk> liisamk has joined #pbg
17:00:35 <George> present+ George
17:00:42 <liisamk> present +
17:00:43 <Dan_Sanicola> Dan_Sanicola has joined #pbg
17:00:49 <ivan> present+
17:00:51 <dauwhe> present+ dauwhe
17:00:54 <rkwright> present + rkwright
17:00:56 <Dan_Sanicola> present+
17:01:08 <Avneesh> present+
17:01:09 <Rachel> Rachel has joined #pbg
17:01:15 <liisamk> present+ liisamk
17:01:16 <jkamata> jkamata has joined #pbg
17:01:19 <Rachel> present+
17:01:28 <BillM> present+
17:01:35 <Julian_Calderazi> Hello everybody. Check mics are muted pls ;o)
17:01:50 <laudrain> laudrain has joined #pbg
17:01:52 <Avneesh> will be mainly available on IRC due to unstable connection
17:01:58 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pbg
17:02:00 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+
17:02:00 <laudrain> present+
17:02:08 <tzviya> present+
17:02:16 <jkamata> present+
17:02:21 <Julian_Calderazi> present+
17:02:35 <jyoshii> present+
17:03:17 <Rachel> scribenick: Rachel
17:03:20 <wolfgang> present+ wolfgang
17:03:28 <garth> garth has joined #pbg
17:03:36 <Rachel> Topic: feedback for proposed charter
17:03:37 <garth> present+ Garth
17:03:43 <Brian> present +
17:03:52 <ivan> present+ Brian
17:03:55 <dauwhe> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OKmYjSGRx7ttipWTmngGHQkJmxnrH2tcePFOb-gQ7Pc/edit#heading=h.k3859or7msx
17:03:55 <rkwright> EDRLab summit prep is running long.  What is the plan for conf call?
17:04:01 <mateus> mateus has joined #pbg
17:04:02 <Rachel> BillM: looks okay to me
17:04:03 <dauwhe> q?
17:04:13 <garth> q?
17:04:22 <tzviya> present+ Brian
17:04:45 <Rachel> George: clarification - the community group and their specifications would be approved by the CG and would no longer need the BG to approve?
17:04:50 <mateus> present+
17:05:19 <garth> q?
17:05:27 <Rachel> dauwhe: that's not what it says. it reflects BG approval of CG documents as was documented in the merger agreement.
17:05:54 <Rachel> ... it's unusual for W3C but it's also unusual for a CG to manage rec track work
17:06:11 <Rachel> ivan: it is not - we need to be careful about this
17:06:56 <Rachel> ivan: the w3c process for rec track work does not apply here
17:07:03 <garth> q?
17:07:32 <Rachel> George: having the PBG approve the CG may help in terms of IP
17:07:34 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #pbg
17:07:40 <Avneesh> What about renaming steering committee to coordination committee?
17:07:40 <laurentlemeur> present+
17:08:07 <Rachel> George: the sooner we get to epub4 the better
17:08:10 <garth> q?
17:08:18 <ivan> present+ RickJ
17:08:37 <Rachel> rickJohnson: it might benefit all of us to explicitly state why we need to have this approval
17:08:43 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
17:08:43 <Zakim> Present: George, ivan, dauwhe, Dan_Sanicola, Avneesh, liisamk, Rachel, BillM, Bill_Kasdorf, laudrain, tzviya, jkamata, Julian_Calderazi, jyoshii, wolfgang, Garth, Brian, mateus,
17:08:46 <Zakim> ... laurentlemeur, RickJ
17:08:46 <Zakim> On IRC I see laurentlemeur, mateus, garth, Bill_Kasdorf, laudrain, jkamata, Rachel, Dan_Sanicola, liisamk, rkwright, Brian, Avneesh, George, jyoshii, wolfgang, Julian_Calderazi,
17:08:46 <Zakim> ... RRSAgent, Zakim, BillM, tzviya, ivan, Karen, bigbluehat, dauwhe
17:08:54 <BillM> q+
17:08:54 <Karen> present+ Karen
17:09:18 <Rachel> garth: it dates back to the merger - the BG was where all members could join without money but there are ongoing legal challenges with the merger and this protects our agreement moving into that space
17:09:54 <garth> ack BillM
17:09:57 <Rachel> RickJohnson: outside of the legal issue my understanding was the board approved spec releases in the IDPF and this is replacing that board
17:10:33 <Rachel> BillM: I think Garth explained this well, the w3c inherited this through some unspecified process and decided not to make this a rec through the standardized process
17:10:46 <Rachel> ... the BG will provide some formality to the CG
17:10:59 <Rachel> ...where CGs traditionally did not produce specs etc
17:11:03 <ivan> +1 to BillM
17:11:18 <Bill_Kasdorf> q+
17:11:27 <garth> q?
17:11:35 <Brian> q+
17:11:35 <Rachel> ...there is no real precedent to this at the w3c. You can see this as an expedient way to introduce changes
17:12:15 <Rachel> rickjohnson: of the fundamental issue is that there is a group outside the CG that sways the CG work then should that be managed within the CG instead
17:12:17 <liisamk> q+
17:12:23 <garth> q+
17:12:34 <Rachel> BillM: that was an explicit decision of the directors and TBL
17:12:49 <Rachel> ... there may be complaints
17:13:15 <Rachel> rickjohnson: if we can insert business oversight into the CG then that might be the solution we need
17:13:19 <Rachel> ack Bill_Kasdorf
17:13:38 <Rachel> Bill_Kasdorf: there is def a precedent for things deevloped in a CG and then headed to a rec track
17:13:50 <Rachel> ...the BG is not just involved with the CG but also the BG
17:13:56 <wolfgang> s/deevloped/developed/
17:14:06 <garth> q?
17:14:15 <Rachel> ...it is meant to provide a business perspective. It's reasonable to provide this kind of role
17:14:27 <garth> ack Brian
17:14:33 <Rachel> ...this work from the CG will inform the WG and epub4
17:14:53 <Rachel> Brian: does the CG in managing epub3 go away when epub4 is released?
17:14:56 <Rachel> ivan: yes
17:15:09 <Rachel> garth: upon the retirement of epub3, yes
17:15:31 <Rachel> Brian: there was some discussion of a 2 year window for the CG?
17:15:40 <Rachel> dauwhe: the CG has no expiration date
17:15:56 <Rachel> BillM: the BG has a 2 year charter
17:16:29 <dauwhe> q+
17:16:49 <Rachel> ... after 2 years the BG charter needs to be reissued, but the CG itself has indefinite life
17:17:08 <JensKlingelhofer> JensKlingelhofer has joined #pbg
17:17:42 <dauwhe> I don't think the PBG charter expires. It's undated, as are other BG charters.
17:18:02 <Rachel> ... every commitment can vary in length, but most are 2 years in length (like the BG)
17:18:58 <dauwhe> Current PBG Charter: https://www.w3.org/2017/02/PublishingBGcharter
17:19:06 <Rachel> ...as garth indicated if epub3 is in maintenance mode and development has stopped, we likely won't need an epub3 community group but we are a long ways away from that time
17:19:50 <garth> ack liisamk
17:19:57 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1 to what Brian just said
17:20:07 <Rachel> Brian: I agree with RickJohnson and his perspective in integrating oversight in the CG but since the agreement is in place regarding the 2 year time period, I will respect that and reraise in one years time if necessary
17:20:24 <dauwhe> q- as liisamk made my point :)
17:20:28 <dauwhe> q?
17:20:31 <Rachel> liisamk: this charter is undated and there is no wording in the charter indicating the time limit
17:20:31 <dauwhe> q-
17:20:33 <garth> ack garth
17:21:09 <Rachel> garth: I think we should continue as we are until the merger is formally closed.
17:21:19 <garth> q?
17:21:30 <Rachel> ... we've come a long way in resolving this with 25 +1s, 1 0, and 1 -1
17:21:57 <dauwhe> "When the group discusses an issue on the mailing list and there is a call from the group for assessing consensus, after due consideration of different opinions, the Chairs should record a decision and any objections. "
17:21:59 <Rachel> liisamk: should we approve or put it out to a 72 hour vote
17:22:06 <BillM> q+
17:22:32 <Rachel> ivan: it's up to us how we manage ourselves. However, having a 72 cooling period for the vote may be a good idea.
17:22:38 <garth> ack BillM
17:23:02 <garth> s/25/something like 25/
17:23:03 <Rachel> BillK: then we would have numerical documentation of the votes
17:23:26 <dauwhe> Note that I've resolved all the comments on the Google Doc
17:23:33 <Rachel> BillM: theres no firm requirement one way or another but a vote would be beneficial
17:23:40 <Rachel> liisamk: sending out for vote
17:23:50 <Rachel> Topic: Revised slate
17:24:02 <Rachel> BillM: the adjustment mentioned in email
17:24:05 <Rachel> ...?
17:24:15 <ivan> q+
17:24:22 <Rachel> ...we had 2 folks offering to engage from the Japan side
17:24:31 <Rachel> ... ??? was willing to serve as colead
17:25:06 <Brian> Rachel: it is Daihei Shiohama (Media Do)
17:25:13 <ivan> s/???/Daihei/
17:25:28 <Rachel> ... the two Japanese representatives have agreed to share responsibilities.
17:25:43 <Brian> proposed additional co-chair is Junichi Yoshii (Kodansha)
17:25:46 <Rachel> ...this ensures representation from Japanese publishers
17:26:18 <Rachel> ...Daihei Shiohama and Junichi Yoshii would lead together in the external coordination task force
17:26:29 <Brian> q+
17:26:32 <Rachel> ack ivan
17:28:02 <Brian> Ivan: w3c staff are ex-officio on these groups, for the record
17:29:06 <Rachel> Brian: this working group is meant to coordinate with other groups
17:29:15 <Rachel> ... I would want to hold at three
17:29:25 <Rachel> ...so the overhead doesn't out weigh the outcome
17:29:32 <Rachel> ...(task force)
17:29:51 <BillM> PROPOSED: new Steering Committee slate (including co-chairs and BG task force leads as previously communicated, with addition of Junichi Yoshii of Kodansha who has been added as a co-chair of the External Coordination task force) is considered elected by consensus
17:30:05 <dauwhe> q+
17:30:23 <Rachel> ivan: should we reconsider the name of steering committee as it is a loaded term
17:30:41 <Rachel> George: we may need to until the merger agreement is fully in place
17:30:43 <laudrain> +1
17:30:54 <dauwhe> q-
17:31:08 <Rachel> BillM: we need the name to remain in place since it is specified in the IDPF/W3C merger documents
17:31:12 <dauwhe> ack Brian
17:31:14 <ivan> q-
17:31:19 <ivan> ack Brian
17:31:48 <Julian_Calderazi> I think we agree.
17:31:56 <Rachel> liisamk: do we need to put this out along with the revised charter
17:32:05 <ivan> +1
17:32:10 <Rachel> garth: I think we should put it out and just count the votes this time
17:32:33 <Brian> q+
17:33:07 <garth> ack Brian
17:33:35 <Rachel> Brian: the issue that is not easily addressed from daniel is being creator and evaulator
17:33:54 <Rachel> ...the resolution there is in resignation from one or the other groups
17:33:58 <laudrain> q+
17:34:05 <Rachel> ...we should put to a vote
17:34:06 <ivan> ack laudrain
17:34:15 <wolfgang> s/evaulator/evaluator/
17:34:16 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pbg
17:34:26 <Rachel> laudrain: I want to mention that of the people on the slate, we have no negative votes. Daniel didn't vote.
17:34:41 <Rachel> ...his objections was and are still with the charter
17:34:48 <ivan> s/vote./vote against./
17:35:07 <dauwhe> +1
17:35:08 <Rachel> liisamk: can we move ahead?
17:35:10 <Brian> +1
17:35:10 <Julian_Calderazi> +1
17:35:10 <tzviya> +1
17:35:11 <garth> +1
17:35:11 <wolfgang> +1
17:35:12 <Rachel> +1
17:35:14 <Dan_Sanicola> +1
17:35:14 <laudrain> +1
17:35:16 <ivan> +1
17:35:16 <laurentlemeur> +1
17:35:17 <George> +1
17:35:20 <rkwright> +1
17:35:20 <JensKlingelhofer> +1
17:35:21 <mateus> +1
17:35:21 <liisamk> +1
17:35:26 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1
17:35:34 <Rachel> +1 Rick Johnson
17:35:35 <Avneesh> +1
17:35:55 <ivan> RESOLVED: new Steering Committee slate (including co-chairs and BG task force leads as previously communicated, with addition of Junichi Yoshii of Kodansha who has been added as a co-chair of the External Coordination task force) is considered elected by consensus
17:36:00 <Rachel> liisamk: let's move forward
17:36:08 <Rachel> Topic: proposal for funding epubcheck
17:36:09 <ivan> Topic: Epubcheck
17:36:48 <Rachel> rickjohnson: coresource is a sister company that sees lots of epubs flowing through
17:36:59 <Rachel> ...we asked who relies on epubcheck
17:37:25 <Rachel> ...there were 20-25 a level publishers and 5-6 key channels that are hurt by eubcheck not remaining current or functional
17:37:40 <Rachel> ...we can ask each of them for a $5000 donation for support
17:37:48 <wolfgang> s/eubcheck/epubcheck/
17:37:53 <Rachel> ...I've asked tzviya to help write a purpose statement
17:38:14 <Rachel> ...that is well over $100K that we could raise to hire a developer to do this work
17:38:20 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #pbg
17:38:24 <tzviya> q+
17:38:31 <Rachel> liisamk: essentially we would be talking about crowdsourcing funding
17:38:42 <Rachel> ... is there a plan for maintenance?
17:38:56 <Rachel> rickjohnson: this would be primarily for upating
17:39:07 <rkwright> q+
17:39:10 <Rachel> liisamk: BillM?
17:39:16 <laurentlemeur> q+
17:39:20 <wolfgang> s/upating/updating/
17:40:07 <Rachel> BillM: bring epub up to snuff, track it to the latest version, deal with the languishing pull requests and technical debt - if that costs $100K then we should assume a fraction of that for support.
17:40:29 <Rachel> ... if someone funds $5K for updating, can they also pay $1K in maintenance fees a year?
17:40:40 <Rachel> ...is there a fee schedule that is reasonable for these players
17:41:52 <Rachel> ...we may need a more significant investment for epub4
17:42:00 <Rachel> ack tzviya
17:42:11 <Rachel> tzviya: there is a draft statement
17:43:10 <Rachel> ...there is a maintenance release, an update release, and a total rehaul. We need a discussion about who would work on this and how many hours this would take - including the hours needed for the tiers of development
17:43:17 <Rachel> ack rkwright
17:43:31 <Rachel> rkwright: I and readium would like to particupate
17:43:50 <Rachel> ...I did some work with Romain to spec out what needs to be done
17:43:53 <wolfgang> s/particupate/participate/
17:44:09 <Rachel> ...and I want to work with this group to see how it should be done etc
17:44:27 <garth> q?
17:44:33 <Rachel> ack laurentlemeur
17:44:54 <Rachel> laurentlemeur: it's great to have the BG sizing this and estimating needs
17:45:02 <George> q+
17:45:15 <Rachel> ...this is a good way to have an independent org managing this money and plans
17:45:23 <BillM> q+
17:45:26 <Rachel> liisamk: are you proposing readium manage the money
17:45:55 <Rachel> laurentlemeur: the BG has no bank account and readium is a technically focused company so this seems reasonable
17:45:56 <laurentlemeur> q-
17:46:01 <Rachel> ack George
17:46:22 <Rachel> george: as long as DAISY and others can participate I think this would be terrific
17:46:31 <Rachel> ack billm
17:46:41 <Rachel> BillM: I agree with laurentlemeur
17:46:57 <Rachel> ...a low overhead, focused group will spend funds most efficiently
17:47:29 <Rachel> ... the first line of business is to see what the market will bear
17:47:45 <Rachel> ...we shouldn't rule out the w3c as managing the funds
17:48:09 <Rachel> ...let's start with a prospectus and maybe some quid pro quo
17:48:40 <Rachel> ...allowing contributers to work on the task force determining the future work to be done
17:49:15 <Rachel> liisamk: feelings about this as a fundraising method?
17:49:19 <tzviya> +1
17:49:23 <ivan> +1
17:49:23 <Brian> +1
17:49:23 <Rachel> garth: absolutely
17:49:24 <garth> q?
17:49:26 <Rachel> +1
17:49:30 <garth> +1
17:49:32 <laudrain> +1
17:49:37 <wolfgang> +1
17:49:42 <Rachel> RickJohnson: I'm coming for all of you
17:50:01 <garth> q?
17:50:23 <Rachel> liisamk: let's get this compiled and distributed
17:50:26 <JensKlingelhofer> +1
17:50:32 <Rachel> ...then we can follow up on the prospectus
17:50:43 <ivan> present+ JensKlingelhofer
17:50:53 <Rachel> rickjohnson: I don't know if we can make the list from coresource public
17:50:54 <Julian_Calderazi> hahah
17:51:11 <Rachel> ...so the source of the messaging might be Ingram rather than w3c
17:51:15 <tzviya> q+
17:51:20 <Rachel> ... I need to make sure we have permission
17:51:22 <garth> ack tzviya
17:51:41 <Rachel> tzviya: we should not put the whole burden on coresource
17:51:55 <rkwright> like Amazon?
17:51:56 <Rachel> ...we should contact apple and other companies that rely on epubcheck
17:52:19 <garth> q?
17:52:44 <Rachel> Topic: Kicking off task forces
17:53:13 <Brian> Hachette is so flush they can put two people on this call
17:53:16 <Rachel> liisamk: how should we move forward with these task forces
17:53:28 <Julian_Calderazi> smaller task forces should be ok for me.
17:53:46 <Rachel> ivan: each task force will be unique. I'm not sure there's a universal role.
17:53:54 <laudrain> q+
17:54:06 <Rachel> garth: maybe a document that each team can contribute to that will work to shame people into action
17:54:18 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #pbg
17:54:27 <tzviya> q+
17:54:32 <tzviya> ack la
17:54:36 <Rachel> laudrain: should we use the task force system
17:54:48 <Rachel> ivan: people are still afraid of github
17:54:56 <garth> ack laudrain
17:54:57 <Rachel> liisamk: so we should use google docs?
17:55:00 <garth> ack tzviya
17:55:23 <Rachel> tzviya: it might be helpful to feature different task forces on the call.
17:55:35 <garth> me/ Shame == Opportunity for Fame
17:55:55 <Rachel> liisamk: anything else
17:56:17 <Rachel> laudrain: I will put myself on the hook for the next call
17:56:50 <Rachel> George: can we send out a redlined and not redlined version?
17:57:00 <garth> q+
17:57:02 <Rachel> liisamk: yes,  we should do that
17:57:06 <Rachel> ack garth
17:57:28 <Julian_Calderazi> +1
17:57:28 <ivan> Liisa++++
17:57:32 <Karen> +1
17:57:33 <Rachel> garth: this is the first time in a while that this felt like we were moving in a positive direction
17:57:45 <ivan> present+ karen
17:58:04 <Julian_Calderazi> by all!
17:58:07 <BillM> BillM has left #pbg
17:58:09 <Julian_Calderazi> bye*
17:58:09 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:58:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/02/13-pbg-minutes.html ivan
17:58:43 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
17:58:43 <RRSAgent> I see no action items