Publishing Business Group Telco -- 06 Nov 2018

<Julian_Calderazi> +Present

<Karen> scribenick: Karen

Luc: We are 21 now on irc
... and 13 on the phone
... let's start
... We had TPAC the week before last
... We had an interesting report from Wendy Reid

<Ralph> -Present

<laudrain> https://www.w3.org/blog/2018/11/publishing-at-tpac-2018/

Luc: meant to put link in the agenda
... here it is in irc
... you will find interesting points about what happened during the f2f of the PubWG
... and links to minutes of day one and day two
... interesting to come back to if you want to know what happened, especially for the Publishing Working Group
... don't know if we have comments on general discussions or issues, but I would like to step on the main subject for today
... which is the discussion that started in the TPAC f2f session of PubWG

<ivan> -> Joint BG/WG meeting's minutes: https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2018/2018-10-23-pwg.html#section1

Luc: the question of the priorities and changes with PubBG
... we discussed this after TPAC
... and have written a report for people at Hachette
... concerns for EPUB3.2 being finished by CG
... CG has approved the new spec of EPUB3.2
... but now we have issues about its promotion and deployment
... EPUB3.2 is in front of EPUB4
... in front of WG
... for 2020
... during this time we have EPUBCheck that is revised
... and will be ready for EPUB3.2 by 2019
... this was raised during the f2f session
... and it was a bit of a concern
... The big concern about EPUB3.2 is not being completely interoperable
... we know it has issues and bugs
... we know reading systems have bugs about EPUB3
... We had discussions about improving interop of EPUB3 among reading systems
... would be very important for CG to continue its work gathering all the bugs we know around the world
... so we have better pressure against reading systems
... but also the next steps for EPUB3.2 would be testing the features
... all the features of EPUB3.2, features that are "must" and "should"
... this was also raised during the f2f
... we had discussions about priorities
... An issue about audio books
... not yet possible in EPUB3
... but it's a business issue that it is not easy to distribute audio books
... we would expect the work on audio books from Web Publication WG would be useful
... had discussions on this subject where we saw a business use case for packaged audio books
... not in EPUB3 but in using work on Web Publishing
... Fourth item
... in Japan and Korea
... they prefer ISO and not W3C standards, so there is a need for EPUB3 as an ISO standard
... EPUB3.2 as it is today; there will soon be a CG note
... it is not recognized as an ISO standard
... So we have this plan
... Idea is to make EPUB3.2 to move to a W3C Recommendation path
... EPUB3.2 should be promoted inside the Working Group
... promoted as a Recommendation
... and it has several meanings
... The PubWG would take the work of EPUB3.2 as a recommendation
... and beside the continuing work on Web Publication
... Web Publication work would continue in the WG and add the application of audio book as soon as possible
... we are speaking of a modular development or modular standard of web publication for audio books
... Because of difficulty thinking about EPUB3
... we would then post-pone or speak less about EPUB4
... that would be a consequence of adoption of Web Publication and Audio publication
... To start this work there is an obvious need to change the charter
... the current Web Publications WG charter does not reflect this
... it would have to reflect this and reflect difference between web publication and audio pub
... and we had an expression 'in the fridge' , later for EPUB4
... We know this rec track
... being possible through a new charter, would need testing of different features among reading systems
... testing comes urgently
... to have results of each feature to be tested against at least two working implementations
... this is a W3C requirement
... We imagine that during the time we work on rewriting a new charter
... to rewrite this change
... the CG would fulfill need of testing
... CG could work on what needs to be tested
... identify the 'should' and 'must'
... For EPUB community, would be good for testing to be thoroughly done
... maybe in a new EPUB test.org
... besides the bugs
... CG could start quickly on this and hopefully it would be available if we decide a rec track
... it is absolutely necessary for this testing to be done to go onto rec track
... So that is the proposed plan
... and PubBG needs to consider this plan
... I would like to present positive way to think about this
... There would be a lot of improvement on interop, testing and bug fixing
... it would have more pressure as a W3C rec track on reading systems
... and it would answer need for internationalization for ISO standards
... path for ISO to adopt W3C recs
... and not to rewrite a new EPUB standard
... it would be interesting to have this availble
... that's where my report stops
... but there are also issues
... and a negative way to present things
... Before presenting the negative side of things
... First of all, I would like to say that the PubBG does not have to decide today or tonight about rec track or not
... During TPAC we had Ivan say we need to know quickly what the PubBG thinks because it's a lot of work
... and we need to have the position of the PubBG
... Liisa and I know we cannot decide on just one call
... there will be more calls and a formal vote
... We have until end of November to decide
... Purpose of these calls is to build toward decision
... Liisa and I have started shared doc with pros and cons of moving EPUB3.2 to rec track

<jeff> +1 to spending the right amount of time to come up with a Business Group recommendation.

Luc: The other side of the @...issues on this process
... is about things we expressed during TPAC
... and discussions in May
... We don't have infinite resources
... working on two, we need more resources
... or less work will get done at the same time
... working on charter will take energy from WG
... so less energy and less time to work on Web Publications and the audio portion that we have identified as urgent for the market
... There is an issue on resources

<MURATA> I'm wondering if we can establish another WG dedicated for 3.2

Luc: and an issue on the maintenance of EPUB3
... with maintenance of EPUB3, writing this EPUB3.2 specification

<Ralph> [perhaps the Business Group could take the lead on drafting a WG charter?]

Luc: it was in the CG, where publishing industry can contribute at no cost
... When we move to a WG, it will be necessary for publishers
... through PubBG or full member fees
... that is an issue for publishers
... We know that end of TPI
... we are doing their best effort to convince TPI members to become regular/full members of W3C, or at least participants in the PubBG
... but will not be able to convince everyone
... Same side of resources
... if we have less people, we will have less energy
... That is a second issue
... I saw a mail from Laurent Lemeur today
... may be difficulties about EPUB3.2 being a web standards
... as the TAG would say [W3C Technical Architecture Group]
... we cannot foresee an easy success
... We cannot foresee an easy success for the charter to become a WG with these changes
... Also, I think about ISO for Japan and Asian people

<Ralph> [the Business Group can help by describing its vision of how EPUB helps advance the Web]

Luc: there should be more Japanese people on the Working Group
... If there is a goal to bring EPUB3.2 to the rec track to prepare an ISO standard, this part of group should include more Japanese people
... I think there should be a chair or co-chair from Japan
... those are some issues to consider

<MURATA> +q

Luc: We have to discuss among us during this call
... and through the mailing list
... using this document of pros and cons
... and use the next days and weeks to build our decision
... the PubBG has to build decision about EPUB3.2 going to rec track
... do we think as an industry we need to go to rec track
... we have to build our decision
... and we have to all contribute

<liisamk> draft pros, cons, questions doc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17CyIqihtjjzT7Abbcq9sSqLNqLGKs2cuXdg4DcFulGY/edit?usp=sharing

Luc: only 21 on irc now, but over 80 people in PubBG
... we will have a specific call for Asian people next week
... another BG call for all Asian people time slot
... and re-explain these issues
... there will be real participation of all the Business Group people; we have to build an informed decision
... That is the goal we have

<Zakim> dauwhe, you wanted to comment on TAG review of EPUB

Dave: Thank you, Luc for that very good summary of all the issues
... I don't think we can make the decision for rec track for EPUB in isolation

<tzviya> see Dave's email https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishingbg/2018Nov/0022.html

Dave: We need a clear picture of how we want EPUB to evolve in the near future and how that relates to web publications
... some see these as two separate things
... I would want a clear picture of how we see these things evolving
... Also comment on people who know more about W3C process
... Could TAG really block something where architectural decisions have already been made?

<dauwhe> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishingbg/2018Nov/0022.html

Dave: I have written some up in greater detail at this link

Luc: I would like to answer quickly on idea of isolation
... because my concern is that we are putting a lot of energy on EPUB3 being adopted
... and putting money on EPUBCheck

<MURATA> Three cheers!

Luc: and many people from DAISY Consortium
... we have said this winter is EPUB3 winter
... when publishing industry as a whole comes to EPUB3
... and EPUB3.2 is our best card
... for the publishing industry there is a danger
... my personal view
... there is a danger if we post-pone EPUB3.2
... forgot to say the rec track of EPUB3.2
... would be on the CG note
... it is not a new spec
... should be what the CG has written to bring it as a rec specification
... should not be rewritten because we will lose the publishing industry and lose the battle of EPUB3 if we bring something new
... and we lose time

<garth> +1 Luc

<scribe> scribenick: George

<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to comment on resources and involving TAG

<garth> +1 Tzviya

TS: We have epubcheck and implementers working on testing. We would get the best of both worlds with the testing moving forward...

We want EPUB 3.2 to be successful no matter what we do.

<Zakim> ivan, you wanted to comment on "explainer"

We have a resource issue.

IH: The charter itself is simple to write. What we have to publish ..We need a document like what Dave has started. This document will be the important.

The direction we are taking and what is written is sound and that there is a real business case for what we are doing.

It is not the working group that will develop the charter the load is on a smaller group of people.

The business group that will have a larger role. The real core is like the one that Dave has started.

Makoto: I don't believe the Japanese need an ISO standard for 3.2.

Hiroshi Kawamura is asking for the accessibility ISO standard.

I don't believe the Japanese publishers will participate in W3C.

There is a strong interest from accessibility, but not from publishers.

We need underlying EPUB standards to have accessibility standards.

Makoto is not optimistic that Japanese will participate.

Avneesh: If we want to put EPUB 3.2 to ISO, it may not be necessary through rec track.

We want EPUB in ISO so the standard is before the countries.

The accessibility spec is not dependent of 3.2. The accessibility can apply to any version of EPUB.

<MURATA> Any version of EPUB*3*?

Ralph: Makoto and Avneesh remind us that this community must come to concensis. I look forward to the intense discussion.

<Ralph> Technical Architecture Group [TAG] home page

Regarding the TAG and here is a pointer.

Three bullet items: the third bullet is to coordinate crosscheck architectural design.

and would like an explainer document.The TAG is asking questions

<dauwhe> https://w3ctag.github.io/explainers

The expresession of consensus could be described in this technical explainer document.

This can frame the questions we ask of the TAG.

The TAG will focus on technical questions.

<MURATA> +q

How does this proposed technology work with the existing web technology.

In the course of answering questions, they can point out concerns and suggest paths forward.

<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to comment on the TAG's authority

But, if the TAG has a clear concern,

<wolfgang> s/Butt/But/

That is likely to influence the rest of the web community and would influence the W3C Members as they advise the Director on a proposed Working Group charter.

<MURATA> -q

<ivan> s/likley/likely/

The TAG's archectual perspective does have significant influence across the web.

We have a responsibility to explain EPUB and how it would work moving forward.

Jeff: Regarding what Makoto said, the assessment is that it is unlikely that the Japanese would not participate, I hope he would be wrong.

<Ralph> ralph: The BG could help by describing its vision of How EPUB helps advance the Web and this would be a good thing to include in the "explainer"

<MURATA> Not for 3.2 REC. But for Publishing@W3C in general.

Jeff mentioned several companies who have joined and that he is meeting with several publishers and asking them to participate.

Overall I am trying to keep score, Luc's explanation reflected what I saw.

But, as I look at the email thread, I was able to document seven different dimensions of concern.

We need to be thoughtful on how to bring this forward.

For example features that lack sufficient implementations.

Dave said we need to map this to the overall direction.

Lauren is concerned about the relation to the many groups.

The seventh is how exactly EPUB 3.2, audio books and web publications all fit together.

<rkwright> s/unlickley/unlikely/

With this many dimensions, perhaps a small group can boil down the positives.

They could come back with a proposal that touches on all the dimensions of the issues.

Perhaps this small group could bring a mind meld of concensis to the group.

Luc, Please list the issues.

<wolfgang> s/consensis/consensus/

<liisamk> Jeff's dimensions of concerns: 7 dimensions of concern * features that may lack sufficient implementation - makoto * map into the overall roadmap - Dave * who has responsibility for what - Laurent * relationship with the TAG * resources * business case * how will 3.2 and audiobooks and 4.0 going to fit together for time

<laudrain> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17CyIqihtjjzT7Abbcq9sSqLNqLGKs2cuXdg4DcFulGY/edit?usp=sharing

Luc Liisa has prepared a shared document for pros and cons. Here is the link.

We should put the concerns on both sides in this document.

<Zakim> laudrain, you wanted to discuss 2 practical points

We need to schedule a call for next Tuesday November 13.

The normal time slot

<Avneesh> What is the Asian friendly time?

<liisamk> we have an extra call on the 13th for the asian time slot :)

We need an invitation to go out for November 13 that uses the same time ad the December 18 call. There will be two calls one on November 13 and one on December 18.

The agenda for the 13 will be the same

In UTC it isIt might be 24 UTC.

<Avneesh> 00 UTC is good for east asia but may not be for central Asia

TS: Regarding What Jeff raised, we have a large decision to make. It is not reflecting on EPUB 3.2

Liisa: Pros cons and open questions are on the public document, all on one page.

<garth> Invite for next Tuesday [Asia time] sent (twice)

Any more thoughts?

We need time to build this decision. We need to have everybody on board. We are a small group and we need to spread the word.

Jeff: It is not clear if we want to have a small group to develop a unified approach.

<liisamk> liisa will help with unification

Who is willing to step and develop a specific proposal?

<tzviya> i will help

<laudrain> ok to help

<garth> Me three.

<garth> Thank you Luc!

Liisa: I think a small group is coming together.

Ivan, who will lead, we don't want to decide now, ubt it is a major question.

<garth> Liisa — woo hoo!

Liss has volunteered to lead the small group.

Goodbye!

<Julian_Calderazi> thank you all. bye!

- DRAFT -

Publishing Business Group Telco

06 Nov 2018

Attendees

Contents

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output