15:41:29 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwg
15:41:29 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/09/17-pwg-irc
15:41:39 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #pwg
15:41:51 <tzviya> meeting: PWG Weekly Telco
15:41:55 <tzviya> Chair: Tzviya
15:41:59 <tzviya> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2018Sep/0012.html
15:42:26 <tzviya> Date: 2018-09-17
15:50:06 <cmaden2> cmaden2 has joined #pwg
15:52:47 <romain> romain has joined #pwg
15:56:47 <tzviya> regrets+ Ivan_Herman, Dave_Cramer, Luc_Audrain, Laurent_LeMeur,
15:57:06 <jbuehler> jbuehler has joined #pwg
15:57:57 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pwg
15:59:51 <franco> franco has joined #pwg
16:00:43 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pwg
16:00:58 <bigbluehat> present+ Benjamin_Young
16:01:06 <NickRuffilo> NickRuffilo has joined #pwg
16:01:08 <romain> present+
16:01:08 <tzviya> regrets+ Garth_Conboy
16:01:26 <George> George has joined #pwg
16:01:36 <Jun_Gamo> Jun_Gamo has joined #pwg
16:01:54 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has joined #pwg
16:02:00 <George> present+ George
16:02:01 <wendyreid> present+
16:02:02 <tzviya> zakim, pick a victim
16:02:02 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose George
16:02:21 <Teenya> Teenya has joined #pwg
16:02:22 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
16:02:32 <gpellegrino> present+
16:02:33 <Teenya> present+
16:02:51 <bigbluehat> scribenick: bigbluehat
16:02:52 <JeanKap> JeanKap has joined #pwg
16:03:03 <Jun_Gamo> present+
16:03:13 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pwg
16:03:15 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pwg
16:03:20 <cmaden2> present+ Chris_Maden
16:03:24 <Hadrien> present+
16:03:29 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat has changed the topic to: Meeting 2018-09-17 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2018Sep/0012.html
16:03:37 <tzviya> https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2018/2018-09-10-pwg
16:03:39 <bigbluehat> tzviya: wecome everyone
16:03:42 <dkaplan3> present+
16:03:48 <bigbluehat> TOPIC: reviewing the agenda
16:03:55 <bigbluehat> tzviya: any objections? no. great. minutes approved
16:04:02 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #pwg
16:04:06 <franco> present+
16:04:08 <rkwright> present+
16:04:12 <bigbluehat> ...someone pointed out that last week there was some confusion about the incubation topic
16:04:15 <jbuehler> present+
16:04:23 <bigbluehat> ...and that there was desire to continue that discussion
16:04:32 <bigbluehat> ...can someone clarify the discussion around incubation from last week?
16:04:44 <BenSchroeter> BenSchroeter has joined #pwg
16:04:47 <Avneesh> present+
16:04:48 <BenSchroeter> present+
16:05:21 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat: it was a very brief end of meeting discussion, so not much said yet.
16:05:29 <bigbluehat> tzviya: k. let me give an overview then
16:05:31 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pwg
16:05:39 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+
16:05:40 <tzviya> https://discourse.wicg.io/
16:05:47 <bigbluehat> ...the Web Incubation Community Group was setup as a formal place to incubate ideas
16:05:57 <lsullam> lsullam has joined #pwg
16:05:57 <JuanCorona> JuanCorona has joined #pwg
16:06:02 <bigbluehat> ...toss around ideas, discuss them, and point to exploration projects, etc.
16:06:03 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
16:06:03 <clapierre> clapierre has joined #pwg
16:06:07 <lsullam> present+
16:06:09 <bigbluehat> ...other WG's have done this differently
16:06:14 <JuanCorona> present+
16:06:24 <bigbluehat> ...for instance the Web Annotation WG started out as the Open Annotation Community Group
16:06:42 <bigbluehat> ...some of them are more scattered like the Web Payments WG and their related CGs
16:06:49 <bigbluehat> ...so there are a few different models for this
16:06:56 <bigbluehat> ...we have a lot of great ideas that have been discuss here
16:07:07 <bigbluehat> ...but as yet there's not an incubation location to explore them further
16:07:23 <bigbluehat> ...we've talked about some of those explorations here, but they've not really been given a place to continue
16:07:31 <bigbluehat> ...and that's what we're exploring here
16:07:44 <bigbluehat> ...perhaps that's not another CG, but we do want some area where we more formally incubate them
16:07:59 <bigbluehat> ...and when they reach greater maturity, and then present them to the WG
16:08:22 <bigbluehat> ...I recognize some people are reluctant to using the WICG as it's wide open to the public and not always focused on a single topic
16:08:24 <bigbluehat> ...any thoughts?
16:08:28 <bigbluehat> q?
16:08:50 <bigbluehat> tzviya: the goal of this is to have folks interested in exploring implementations and related ideas, this gives them a home
16:09:07 <bigbluehat> ...if we say WICG is the home, are there objections?
16:09:14 <josh> josh has joined #pwg
16:09:15 <bigbluehat> George: are the threads segmented there?
16:09:29 <bigbluehat> ...or do you get sucked into a massive amount of other things being incubated
16:09:33 <david_stroup> david_stroup has joined #pwg
16:09:38 <josh> present+
16:09:41 <bigbluehat> ...how easy is it to track work there?
16:09:46 <bigbluehat> tzviya: there is a tag and a dpub label
16:09:58 <bigbluehat> https://discourse.wicg.io/search?q=dpub
16:09:58 <MustLazMS> MustLazMS has joined #pwg
16:10:04 <JeanKap> yes. It's a threaded forum conversation
16:10:16 <bigbluehat> ...if I remember correctly, you can follow specific labels
16:10:30 <bigbluehat> ...I'd suggest we start with the WICG
16:10:34 <marisa> marisa has joined #pwg
16:10:34 <JeanKap> It's a dicourse forum. you can turn email on and off.
16:10:35 <bigbluehat> ...it does generate a lot of email
16:10:41 <marisa> present+
16:10:44 <bigbluehat> ...but you can subscribe to a specific topic
16:10:56 <bigbluehat> ...JeanKap I think the question is can you track a single label
16:10:58 <JeanKap> you can do one label too, I believe.
16:11:35 <duga> duga has joined #pwg
16:11:41 <duga> present+
16:12:06 <Rachel> present+
16:12:33 <JeanKap> present+
16:12:41 <JeanKap> q
16:12:51 <tzviya> q+ JeanKap
16:13:41 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat: I'd prefer a CG mapped to a WG--similar to JSON-LD CG & WG or the Open Annotation CG & WG
16:13:43 <George> q+
16:13:56 <bigbluehat> q?
16:14:05 <tzviya> ack JeanKap
16:14:13 <derekjackson> derekjackson has joined #pwg
16:14:13 <dkaplan3> q+
16:14:14 <bigbluehat> tzviya: there are political reasons we might want to start with the WICG and then possibly consider a CG
16:14:19 <bigbluehat> ...we could then consider other options
16:14:36 <bigbluehat> JeanKap: I'd echo that. Starting with the WICG means its already up and running
16:14:42 <George> q-
16:14:51 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
16:14:55 <bigbluehat> ...if there are limitations to it or people have trouble participating there, then we could consider something else
16:15:00 <bigbluehat> ...but all of this is public
16:15:05 <bigbluehat> ...so that shouldn't be a decider
16:15:28 <bigbluehat> dkaplan3: I'm in favor of the WICG option. However, we've already got a massive list of places we have to look
16:15:47 <bigbluehat> ...and we're already in a state where very few WG memebers are actually involved in these places
16:15:48 <timCole> timCole has joined #pwg
16:15:59 <bigbluehat> ...I'm not sure yet-another-place is going to improve that situation
16:16:30 <bigbluehat> ...while I see the need, I think we need to also look at solving how to get the folks less active/interested into the activity
16:16:34 <bigbluehat> ...more noise doesn't seem to be the solution
16:16:52 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I'm hearing that folks aren't keen on the WICG
16:17:00 <bigbluehat> ...what do you think about a GitHub repo under w3c?
16:17:07 <bigbluehat> q+
16:17:08 <bigbluehat> ack Bill_Kasdorf
16:17:13 <bigbluehat> ack bigbluehat
16:17:14 <tzviya> ack bigbluehat
16:18:13 <dkaplan3> My point is less "don't do WICG" and more 'once we open any extra communication channel, we need to be doing a better job of encouraging the quiet folks to participate in the channels we have.'
16:18:27 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat: CG's do get repos automatically, fwiw.
16:18:34 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
16:18:34 <dkaplan3> and I am happy with a new repo
16:18:36 <bigbluehat> ...plus it could attrack new implementer interest, etc.
16:18:46 <bigbluehat> ...would another WG related GitHub repo work?
16:19:00 <bigbluehat> ...we're not going to make a CG right now, but perhaps just another repo is sufficient
16:19:09 <bigbluehat> ...thank you for that discussion. let's get back to the planned agenda
16:19:20 <bigbluehat> TOPIC: Issue Review
16:19:25 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/pull/331
16:19:35 <bigbluehat> tzviya: for some of this I used Rachel's format--which is very helpful
16:19:38 <bigbluehat> ...but for some of them I did not
16:19:42 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/325
16:20:00 <bigbluehat> ...please take a look at these issues and make sure you're OK with them
16:20:09 <bigbluehat> ...sometimes I get the sense that no one looks at these.
16:20:24 <bigbluehat> ...PR 331 is "title element is a MUST for embedded manifests"
16:20:30 <gpellegrino> for me ok
16:20:31 <Hadrien> -1
16:20:35 <bigbluehat> ...anyone have objections on this one? or even know what this is about?
16:20:38 <bigbluehat> q?
16:20:47 <bigbluehat> tzviya: Hadrien what's your -1 about?
16:21:06 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: if it's the issue I'm thinking about, then I've already explained why I'm against it
16:21:13 <bigbluehat> tzviya: then how should we move forward?
16:21:24 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: I don't think we should close it because there isn't resolution
16:21:39 <bigbluehat> tzviya: so... ivan's comment about getting title via a fallback...is that not sufficient?
16:21:55 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: if you look a few comments above that, I've already written why I think that's not ideal
16:22:15 <bigbluehat> ...forcing the fallback pretty much defeats the purpose of having the title being not required in the infoset
16:22:31 <bigbluehat> ...a lot of the time we'll be getting information that's not meant to be the title of the publication
16:22:39 <bigbluehat> ...I believe we're conflating the entry page with the publication itself
16:22:54 <bigbluehat> ...we've had similar discussion before.
16:23:10 <bigbluehat> ...we're using info that not clearly about the publication as if it were meant for the publication
16:23:17 <bigbluehat> tzviya: could you write up your alternative?
16:23:23 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: I believe I already have.
16:23:33 <bigbluehat> tzviya: could you write it as a resolution to the discussion?
16:23:34 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: ok
16:23:42 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I'm realizing I skipped the first item on the agenda
16:23:46 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/projects/4
16:23:52 <bigbluehat> ...we've started using a project structure
16:24:13 <bigbluehat> ...thanks to Rob Sanders from the JSON-LD WG for pioneering this
16:24:27 <bigbluehat> ...we've started curating our issues lists in this project
16:24:40 <bigbluehat> ...it should help give a sense about when things will be explored, etc.
16:24:50 <bigbluehat> ...we may also introduce "propose-closing" as a label or a column
16:25:02 <bigbluehat> ...and the plan is to use this project to further structure our calls going forward
16:25:31 <bigbluehat> TOPIC: primary entry page must be added to reading order when reading order not specified https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/334
16:25:57 <bigbluehat> tzviya: so this is closely related to the PR 331 which Hadrien was objecting to earlier
16:26:14 <bigbluehat> ...I believe Matt's comment was just that was clarification needed, but otherwise this was ready
16:26:21 <bigbluehat> ...are there any other objections to this?
16:26:36 <bigbluehat> ...no? k. I'll put the editorial label on this, and leave it for Matt to complete
16:26:56 <bigbluehat> TOPIC: WP rendering in non-WP Aware browsers https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/271
16:27:01 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/271
16:27:17 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I did summarize this issue https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/271#issuecomment-422052891
16:27:27 <bigbluehat> ...please take a moment to digest this, and we'll discuss it
16:28:03 <bigbluehat> dkaplan3: just to clarify, what is the exact topic of discussion that you want to have happen in the call?
16:28:20 <Avneesh> q+
16:28:54 <bigbluehat> tzviya: basically, we have things in the current spec that require things beyond today's browsers
16:29:07 <bigbluehat> ...but what happens when you open this in a non-WP aware browser?
16:29:25 <tzviya> ack Avneesh
16:29:25 <bigbluehat> ...what is the minimum to provide a useable and accessible publication that works in a browser today (which is non-WP aware)
16:29:39 <bigbluehat> ...basically, how can we focus on building this progressively?
16:30:00 <bigbluehat> Avneesh: basically, what we're proposing is a WP that could work in any kind of browser without any additional scripts
16:30:05 <bigbluehat> ...that may be some years away
16:30:12 <Hadrien> q+
16:30:21 <bigbluehat> ...but what we'd like in the meantime is that a non-WP aware browser should still be able to read them
16:31:01 <bigbluehat> ...the proposal is to ensure that nothing in the specification development prevents the expression of a usable and accessible publication for use today
16:31:03 <tzviya> ack Hadrien
16:31:15 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: I feel it's difficult to address these things at the spec level
16:31:26 <bigbluehat> ...some of this might fit better in a best practice document
16:31:30 <bigbluehat> ...rather than the spec itself
16:31:47 <bigbluehat> ...although we want to provide accessible publication
16:31:59 <bigbluehat> ...this may still be something better put in best practices rather than in the spec
16:32:13 <bigbluehat> tzviya: this gets to the heart of one of the things we continue to discuss, but haven't decided
16:32:28 <Avneesh> q+
16:32:31 <bigbluehat> ...what must a user agent do and what type of user agent must be used to read them
16:32:31 <dkaplan3> q+
16:32:43 <tzviya> ack Avneesh
16:32:45 <bigbluehat> Hadrien: this is the sort of push back we get whenever we try and restrain HTML
16:32:58 <bigbluehat> ...and I expect the same sort of push back if we suggest some sort of template
16:33:37 <josh> q+
16:33:41 <bigbluehat> Avneesh: the idea was to make non-WP aware friendly Web Publication which is accessible
16:33:51 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
16:33:57 <bigbluehat> ...it's meant to be a precaution to avoid WP's that only work in a future WP-aware browser
16:34:16 <bigbluehat> dkaplan3: it doesn't due the conversation a service to think about real edge cases
16:34:31 <bigbluehat> ...HTML has always allowed people to do things like require certain fonts for rendering
16:34:56 <bigbluehat> ...there's no rule in HTML that says that what's produced in it will be usable by everyone
16:35:05 <bigbluehat> ...I think Avneesh's concerns are bigger than accessibility
16:35:08 <tzviya> rrsagent, make logs public
16:35:31 <bigbluehat> ...it's never been possible to meaningfully force actually accessible documents...you just can't
16:35:40 <bigbluehat> ...like meangingful alt text...for example.
16:35:44 <timCole> q+
16:35:55 <bigbluehat> ...something we can enforce is making sure that a WP can still be viewable in a non-WP aware browser
16:36:04 <bigbluehat> ...like making sure you can at least get to the Table of Contents
16:36:10 <bigbluehat> ...you can absolutely enforce that via the spec
16:36:24 <bigbluehat> ...folks will certain break that, and do all kinds of random things, or make it only work in a single reading system
16:36:25 <tzviya> ack josh
16:36:27 <bigbluehat> ...none of that is new
16:36:35 <bigbluehat> ...but I don't think we would try to police that
16:36:42 <bigbluehat> josh: I tend to agree with dkaplan3 and Hadrien and all
16:37:06 <bigbluehat> ...that we may not be able to demand that a WP would always be a progressive enhancement from a Web Page
16:37:24 <bigbluehat> ...but I think it is a practical consideration for how this will work now, today
16:37:28 <duga> q+
16:37:33 <bigbluehat> ...like a WP should work in today's browser
16:37:47 <bigbluehat> ...or to state that in some sort of non-normative--you're a fool if you don't make this work
16:37:53 <George> q+
16:37:57 <bigbluehat> ...I'm not sure how to do this from a pure specification writing perspective
16:38:01 <tzviya> ack timCole
16:38:08 <bigbluehat> ...but I can't imagine why someone wouldn't want them to work in non-WP aware browsers
16:38:24 <bigbluehat> timCole: I believe I agree generally, but I'm a little concerned about the tenor of the discussion
16:38:38 <bigbluehat> ...there should be something that makes it clear that these aren't just a collection of normal web pages
16:38:49 <bigbluehat> ...when you open it, you should see something, and it should be usable
16:39:02 <bigbluehat> ...but we should also say what's different between a web publication and the rest of the web pages on the web
16:39:10 <Avneesh> q+
16:39:14 <bigbluehat> ...and there will be sometime in the future where people will want these additional things
16:39:29 <bigbluehat> ...and developers will start to take advantage of these things in their publications
16:39:38 <bigbluehat> ...we should be careful, then, what things are WP-specific
16:39:45 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I think makes an excellent point
16:39:50 <dkaplan3> q+
16:39:54 <tzviya> ack duga
16:40:05 <bigbluehat> ...what steps are required, then, to make a non-WP aware browser become a WP-aware one
16:40:21 <bigbluehat> duga: I agree with timCole. I believe this goes beyond what the browser/readers will do
16:40:33 <bigbluehat> ...you will want these to be usable in a non-WP aware user agent
16:40:46 <bigbluehat> ...I might put next/prev and up to ToC links in all the pages
16:41:04 <bigbluehat> ...when I now view them in a WP-aware browser, I'd really not want to see those on ever page
16:41:11 <tzviya> q?
16:41:13 <bigbluehat> ...because presumably the WP-aware reader would provide those features
16:41:29 <tzviya> ack George
16:41:32 <bigbluehat> ...what things then do we provide authors to make them work in a non-WP aware UA, but will still look good in a WP-aware one
16:41:43 <bigbluehat> George: it seems to me that there is one item that is essential here
16:41:48 <bigbluehat> ...and that's the Table of Contents
16:42:05 <bigbluehat> ...in an unaware browser, once you leave the ToC, you can't necessarily get back to it
16:42:19 <bigbluehat> ...say you have a collection of materials, and they're reused all over the place
16:42:42 <bigbluehat> ...so you can't link back to that ToC from those because those materials are used in several publications for example
16:42:53 <Karen> Karen has joined #pwg
16:42:55 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1 to George: that's a fundamental thing that distinguishes a publication from a web page
16:42:56 <bigbluehat> ...I don't know what we can do beyond saying "bookmark this ToC" so you can return to the publication
16:42:57 <tzviya> ack Avneesh
16:43:02 <bigbluehat> +1 George
16:43:12 <bigbluehat> Avneesh: I think we're all roughly discussing the same thing
16:43:36 <bigbluehat> ...the ToC, as George mentioned, is the center piece, and then the ability to move next and previous through the items of the publication and then back to the ToC
16:43:51 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
16:43:52 <bigbluehat> ...there are already many discussions around requirements for non-WP aware browsers
16:43:58 <bigbluehat> dkaplan3: what people are saying is alright
16:44:07 <bigbluehat> ...but I don't think we're the first people to discuss this
16:44:16 <bigbluehat> ...these are the basic principles of progressive enhancement
16:44:30 <bigbluehat> ...here are some examples--I know I'm not the only person who does these things
16:44:46 <bigbluehat> ...if I use elinks, I may also use wget, curl, Opera 12, and Sumatra PDF
16:44:54 <bigbluehat> ...these all have varying funcationality
16:45:03 <bigbluehat> ...sometimes if you want something newer, you have to use a newer tool
16:45:12 <bigbluehat> ...progressive enhancement says, do we make content if this JS doesn't work
16:45:32 <bigbluehat> ...and people who make tools who don't allow the JS to work, deal with that reality
16:45:46 <bigbluehat> ...the process is content and tool creators decided if they want to write for less, full-featured tools
16:45:57 <bigbluehat> ...and users deciding if they want to use more full featured tools or not
16:46:13 <Hadrien> the difference is that we're talking about progressive enhancement for a complete (currently "non standard") rendering mode, not a single feature/API
16:46:16 <bigbluehat> ...like Avneesh was saying, we need to define what will happen in a non-WP UA
16:46:26 <bigbluehat> ...it may be that you can't get to parts of the publications
16:46:43 <bigbluehat> ...or maybe you'll do it the other way and write script to hide non-WP content from WP UAs
16:47:08 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I see Hadrien disagrees with this fundamentally
16:47:30 <bigbluehat> ...I think this gets to the core, underlying reason that we disagree about how we approach this spec
16:47:44 <bigbluehat> ...some of us believe that we can take the same approach as progressive web apps
16:47:58 <bigbluehat> ...while others believe we're building a new rendering/reading mode
16:48:15 <bigbluehat> ...something from what timCole said, is if you open a WP in a non-WP aware browser, the following will happen
16:48:30 <bigbluehat> ...however, if you do the same thing in a WP-aware UA, then the following will happen
16:48:33 <dkaplan3> what Tzviya just said plus a gazillion.
16:48:43 <bigbluehat> ...so we're talking about both worlds
16:48:43 <Hadrien> if we're truly creating "progressive enhancements" then we're writing our spec the wrong way, we should divide it into individual features
16:49:07 <bigbluehat> ...both the present as it is today, and what we want from UAs in the future
16:49:42 <bigbluehat> ...these sorts of publications exist today
16:49:56 <bigbluehat> ...plus things provided in an additional reading layer
16:50:03 <josh> q+
16:50:07 <tzviya> ack josh
16:50:11 <bigbluehat> ...we need to define what "WP-aware" means
16:50:38 <bigbluehat> josh: I just wanted to second, third, and forth what you just said about not having done a very good job explaining what we get from WP
16:50:52 <bigbluehat> ...as you know tzviya I've just started trying to convince my employer on what this is
16:50:55 <bigbluehat> tzviya: because we don't know
16:51:06 <bigbluehat> josh: it's like...some meta data on a web page
16:51:17 <bigbluehat> ...I'd appreciate some help trying to explain and sell what this thing is
16:51:30 <bigbluehat> ...having said that, I'm also very interest in hearing an answer to what we're building here
16:51:51 <bigbluehat> tzviya: since no one else is on the queue, I'll try and sum it up
16:52:02 <bigbluehat> ...remember timCole's annotations work from earlier in this group
16:52:12 <bigbluehat> ...I'd like addressibility
16:52:15 <dkaplan3> q+
16:52:21 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
16:52:30 <bigbluehat> dkaplan3: if we're talking about what a WP-aware browser means
16:52:45 <Avneesh> q+
16:52:49 <bigbluehat> ...I'd like to say that everything that all of this can be done without polyfills
16:52:58 <bigbluehat> tzviya: so what would those polyfills be accomplishing?
16:53:11 <tzviya> ack Avneesh
16:53:28 <bigbluehat> dkaplan3: whatever that list of things that we say are WP-aware UA features must be done by the UA for it to be considered a WP-aware browser
16:54:02 <bigbluehat> Avneesh: offlining, accessibility, annotation, bookmarking, highlighting. these all go beyond today's browsers
16:54:16 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I do think many of these features are documented in the use case document
16:54:29 <bigbluehat> josh: I'm not doing well with it at the moment as my focus has been on an implementation
16:54:51 <bigbluehat> ...because part of the sales job is to show what this is and what value you get
16:55:15 <bigbluehat> ...what Avneesh just said about packaging, this is what I get back from my management is EPUB4
16:55:20 <bigbluehat> ...that's all they want is EPUB4
16:55:27 <bigbluehat> tzviya: this is a good segway to the agenda at TPAC
16:55:31 <tzviya> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mt9PTcOdmrCwIsgfxbGMGjwHlUsySU01I0D4oBkSbcA/edit?usp=sharing
16:55:40 <bigbluehat> TOPIC: TPAC agenda
16:55:44 <Avneesh> q+
16:56:02 <bigbluehat> tzviya: on Monday we have half a day on EPUB4
16:56:16 <tzviya> ack Avneesh
16:56:24 <bigbluehat> ...please let us know if there is anything we're missing on the agenda
16:56:49 <bigbluehat> Avneesh: I think marisa had mentioned wanting to discuss synchronized media
16:56:59 <bigbluehat> ...as well as other talks with other groups
16:57:26 <bigbluehat> tzviya: as far as the synchronized media group goes, the last updates were from TPAC from last year
16:57:34 <clapierre> clapierre has left #pwg
16:57:41 <bigbluehat> marisa: we're just about to ping the group again after having done some research, and we're going to wake them up this week
16:57:49 <bigbluehat> tzviya: I have a note that with the APA meeting, at 2:30
16:57:57 <bigbluehat> ...and that they're including synchronized media also
16:58:00 <bigbluehat> ...is that the same discussion?
16:58:07 <bigbluehat> marisa: they might have a broader take on it
16:58:13 <bigbluehat> ...I've talked to them a bit
16:58:19 <bigbluehat> tzviya: how much time would you like for this?
16:58:30 <bigbluehat> marisa: it doesn't need to take too long. maybe 30 minutes?
16:58:42 <bigbluehat> tzviya: hopefully. we haven't gotten any requests for incubation and demos
16:58:58 <bigbluehat> ...jbuehler sent around his table of contents
16:59:07 <bigbluehat> ...but I'll put you marisa in there--which is tuesday morning
16:59:22 <bigbluehat> ...Avneesh as far as APA we'll try and leave that up to others to decide
16:59:38 <bigbluehat> tzviya: one other thing. we've launched the fund raiser for epubcheck
16:59:43 <bigbluehat> ...here's the link
16:59:48 <tzviya> https://www.w3.org/publishing/epubcheck_fundraising
16:59:57 <bigbluehat> ...thank you to everyone at Daisy for helping make this happen
17:00:01 <cmaden2> cmaden2 has left #pwg
17:00:10 <bigbluehat> ...I'm out the next two weeks, but you'll be in good hands
17:00:26 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has left #pwg
17:00:28 <tzviya> rrsagent, make minutes
17:00:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/09/17-pwg-minutes.html tzviya
17:02:21 <evan> evan has joined #pwg
18:05:30 <evan> evan has joined #pwg
18:37:43 <evan> evan has joined #pwg
19:29:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwg
19:33:49 <tzviya> rrsagent, byw
19:33:49 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'byw', tzviya.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
19:33:56 <tzviya> rrsagent, byw
19:33:56 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'byw', tzviya.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
19:34:01 <tzviya> rrsagent, bye
19:34:01 <RRSAgent> I see no action items