Meeting minutes
<ivan> Date: 2020-05-15
<Ralph> previous 01-May
Key items from this week's (Japan-time) Business Group discussion
Ralph: anything urgent from the PBG meeting on Tuesday that we can talk about without Daihei and Liisa?
EPUBCheck fund raising status
Ralph: George, is there more on EPUBCheck fundraising?
George: we had a mistake in
an email; the 2nd had the Apple donation
… and $1500 from Germany
… Luc is still managing it; we've asked him to forward
the status updates
<Ralph> FW: Latest position on EPUBCheck fundraising- 14 May 2020
Ralph: he can post to the list
George: I'll let him know.
Deltour family support
EPUB Accessibility work
Ralph: some background on
this
… y'all know more about the history
… on W3T, we became aware of some scheduling
opportunities WRT adoptions of Euro regulations
… The IDPF epub a11y spec was submitted to ISO
… if the ISO balloting process concludes with adopting
this, it would shut out W3C
… and updates would have to go through ISO process
… now we have a draft EPUB 3 WG charter with a11y as
deliverable
… is it appropriate, useful to indicate in that
charter that might help the ISO process be aware that there is a w3c
rec-track effort to improve that spec
… w3c doesn't have a formal input to the iso process
… but if we had a charter that showed we had an
improved spec on the rec track, that might be useful
… those who know more about the status of EPUB a11y in
ISO might inform us if this would be helpful
tzviya: I have a related
comment
… I was on WAI coord call last week
… there were a few questions about the a11y spec
… there was a lot of concern about why this doc is a
note, why it's happening apart from WAI
… the question is where it's going next
… if it's rec track, where will it live
… should it be in WCAG? Which WCAG?
… and we'd need to talk to the WG immediately
… we need to get it on their radar
… and we need to do a better job of making people in
WAI aware of what we're doing
Ralph: clarifying Jeff's
question
… W3C has PAS privileges, but they kick in only when
we have RECs
<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to react to tzviya to clarify on PAS
Ralph: it's in a draft WG
charter
… the crucial conversation for today is, how quickly
do we need to give more indication that w3c is interesting in doing
REC-track work on EPUB a11y
… to Jeff's Q
… if there's an ISO ballot on something we didn't
submit, our PAS authorization doesn't apply
Ivan: three things
… 1. On Tzviya's comment, today EPUB a11y in EPUB 3 WG
charter is on REC track
… it's alongside the rest of the EPUB specs
… lately we got a stronger involvement from Shadi
Abou-Zahra
… there is also another issue, which I may not
understand because of EU
… the EU has to decide what doc they want to adopt for
a11y regulation
… and that will be the basis of further regulation
… they will have to make this choice in June 2021
… the real Q is beyond the ISO question, the real
choice is what they will do in 2021
… they are supposed to take a doc that's a standard,
and give priority to formal standards bodies like ISO, since W3C is
not on the same level in the eyes of Brussels
… the ISO document will be become a standard before
the end of the year, and we can't stop that
… we should be able to show by June 2021 we have gone
further than the ISO doc, with an a11y doc in complete sync with
EPUB 3.X
… and the EU could then adopt our work
… I'm not 100% how we could achieve that
… Shadi is trying to find out what level of doc we
have to show in June as good-enough proof that we've gone further
than ISO
… that's my understanding
George: Makoto put a
statement in when w3c said it wasn't going to maintain this
… I made it clear that w3c was going to continue to
move forward with the spec
… I was told it need to be ISO for the requirements of
Asian nations
… we also thought it would be helpful in Europe
… it was needed in Japan
<Ralph> [W3C never said that; my understanding is that Murata-san claimed that W3C had made some decision]
George: it was clear we
would be moving it forward
… the group that developed the ISO version... there
were questions about onix along with schema.org metadata; we
realized we would have to address that in the next revision in w3c
… there was no substantive changes in ISO
… I voted in yes in NISO for the U.S.; I commented
there was no substantive difference
… and all pubs that conformed to W3C note would
conform to the ISO spec
Ralph: is it your
understanding that once this ISO ballot completes, then w3C's PAS
capability becomes null?
… could W3C still submit an update? My understanding
is that PAS does not apply once there's an ISO standard
George: I don't know for
sure
… we could ask ???
… the same thing applies to WCAG
… 2.0 is an ISO standard under w3c
Ralph: we can do this for WCAG because w3c was original submitter
<Zakim> jeff, you wanted to talk about harmonization
jeff: clearly we want this
spec to get ISO's blessing
… when Makoto raised this question earlier
… we did not conceive of a path at that time where
EPUB a11y would be on the REC track
… and given the immediacy, we said OK, take it through
a different path
… even though there were representations we were
uncomfortable with
… had we had a REC track, we would have preferred
w3c's path through ISO
… we use a method where we retain change control in
w3c
… if issues are raised in ISO, they are brought to the
relevant W3C group
… but we retain change control
… if specs come through other processes, we lose
change control
… to what extent do we want to risk the fragmentation
of such an important spec?
… we could end up with two different EPUB a11y specs
… EPUB a11y as a theme is very important, esp. in
Europe, if there are two specs there's a risk they'll take the ISO
version
… it could become a problem if the documents diverge
… harmonization is key
… if we think this is important
… do we want to stop the existing submission? I don't
know any other way to ensure harmonization
… we didn't have another path then
… but now we have it in the draft charter
… there might be other paths
Avneesh: we all know the
history
… looking at the future we always planned EPUB a11y as
a short-term state
… the ultimate goal would be everything in WCAG
… we don't want a separate doc
… we want one standard, silver, that covers everything
… we don't think this is something that will go on
forever
… specific to EU, there are three levels
… Technical Spec, which has lowest significance
… then "Standard" which has to come from ISO
… but EU will not accept anything from ISO directly.
… but will ask a Euro organization to pick up the ISO
standard
… the highest level is harmonized
… which can only come from a Euro organization
… so where is EPUB a11y spec now?
… the Euro people don't care about diff between rec
track and CG note
… there are OK with w3c spec and adopt as technical
spec if no one objects
… but if any w3c standard wants to become standard in
EU it's not possible without more process and change
… I don't think there's a question of harmonization
with EU
… we can only ensure by putting EPUB a11y as Technical
Specification
… I don't think we have to worry so much
… if we want higher level, we have to fight with Euro
standards groups and fight for minimal changes
Ralph: clarification on
something...
… the euro folks don't care about rec track vs CG note
<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to react to Avneesh to comment on "don't care about diff"
Ralph: W3C's ability to have
special dispensation under ISO PAS
… to insert a spec we've developed into ISO
… W3C's permission to do that only applies to
REC-track docs
… the Euro folks may not care, but W3C can only do PAS
on REC track
Avneesh: if I see ISO
… even ISO spec can become Euro only with work from
European standards bodies
Cristina: some more info
about EU process
… when we discuss going to ISO
… the commission has an agreement with ISO
… at that time the final proposal for the directive
was not yet published; we were working from draft
… the final version of directive had two possibilities
… one is to give ??? a mandate, to find an existing
standard that is aligned
… if there is not an existing standard, to create
another euro harmonized standard
wendyreid: I am a bit
unaware of the ISO/W3C/EU megacomplexities
… there have been suggestions of what we need to do to
EPUB a11y
… it might not have to happen in the EPUB 3 WG
… I'm ok with moving to WAI
… Cristina has mentioned the need to work on
requirements for FXL a11y
… that's a huge addition
… we'd want to tackle in the WG
… we're ok if one of the first things we have to do is
the A11y work
… and we could notify everyone about what we're
working on, and how it will go beyond the ISO doc
… real changes do need to happen to the document
<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to point out that we cant change what has happened. how to move fwd?
Tzviya: we can't really
change what's happening in ISO
… Jeff asked if it's been approved; I don't think we'd
want to stop it as we agreed as a group
… wendyreid mentioned we need to move forward
… we'll likely split up the doc; move some into silver
… but how to make a11y FXL is more a best practice
than something in WCAG
… how do we divvy this up?
… and meet with silver task force
… and be represented in the WAI coordination group
<Zakim> Cristina, you wanted to react to tzviya
Cristina: my last comment
Ralph: Cristina, you were saying the final version of the directive has 2 possibilities
Cristina: 1 is to give
mandate to euro standards body
… verify if there is existing standard, or need to
create a new one
… and they can see if there's a fitting ISO standard
… this will be long
… publishers may need to produce content not knowing
the final version of the standard
… in 2025 all the books produced and distributed
should be compliant
… we need to have the standard soon
… the other option is that euro commission adopt
"technical specification" which has a different meaning than in ISO
… it just means standard developed in open way, Amazon
would not be accepted, but from a nonprofit with stakeholder
consensus
… if there is a document from w3c that complies with
this requirement, we can describe how it's been developed, and might
be accepted by the commission
… and it must meet the high-level requirements of the
euro a11y act
… so we need to check what's already in the euro
requirement, and prepare a doc which describes how the process
complies with the requirement
… this is better than if commission in june asks for
mandate
… Euro Pub Assoc will agree with us
George: Korea EPUB 3.0.1
through fast PAS process to ISO
… because it's a Korea-adopted standard
… they won't maintain the spec; that's on us
… there's an understanding we'll do the work
… the issue of FXL... we've heard them talk about
multiple renditions in EPUB
… I'm still researching that
<Zakim> jeff, you wanted to comment on ISO to EU process
jeff: several remarks about
how specs go back and forth between W3C / ISO / EU
… how the harmonization process works: everyone likes
harmony. Fragmentation is bad.
… WCAG 2.1 is a good example. WCAG was taken up by the
EU with no changes
… we worked hard to get them to agree to adopt WCAG
… we had everyone understand A. harmonization is good.
B. we have an open process C. The work gets done at W3C
<Ralph> [Jeff cites EN 301 549 - Accessibility requirements suitable for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe]
jeff: so I'm optimistic that
if we pub epub a11y on REC, and repeat our principles to other
standards orgs, that there would be a high likelihood they would want
to adopt the w3c standard
… the issue we have with the current ISO EPUB A11y, it
was done at a time when we didn't have a plan to continue the work
… it's being balloted now; and being voted on by
people who don't understand that there is a new possibility
… I'm not saying we stop the ISO process
… I meant to stay we should communicate to those who
are voting that a new opportunity is coming up
… and the stakeholders should consider that a
harmonized standard might be a better plan
… and develop a REC and use PAS
… and work with all the stakeholders
… on EN 301 549 we worked very closely with EU to meet
their deadlines
Avneesh: I don't think we
should worry about the specification
… if we are going to make substantial changes, it can
be submitted as new standard
… there are even different names
… we can submit a new standard via PAS
Ivan: I try to see what the
next steps could be
… I'm charter editor
… we can make it explicit in the charter what are the
things we intend to do with this doc
… Cristina's remark that we should put into the
charter saying some of the work we should be doing is if the doc is
aligned with the euro rules
… we want to make it aligned with what the EU wants
… the other thing I heard was to take care of FXL a11y
… so making it clear we're moving beyond what ISO is
working on now
… so we can rename as Avneesh mentioned
… and then the next thing, I think we should keep it
in this charter, where we expect to have the expertise
… WAI probably has no idea what FXL is
… more people here understand it
… we have a doc that is in sync with EPUB itself is a
very strong message
… in the WG schedule, we commit ourselves the CR of
this document earlier than the other documents
… can we take the risk of putting a target of June 21
as a target for EPUB a11y
… if we have that, then comes what Jeff says
… and that doc might already be good enough to reach
out to our friends and foes
… and say our goal is harmonization around this work
Cristina: 2 things to jeff
… when you speak about WCAG accepted by EU, was it
technical specification?
<Zakim> Jeff, you wanted to react to Cristina
jeff: the EU standard for
mobile a11y is a broad standard
… i think it says in the standard, for this piece use
WCAG 2.1 from w3
… it's done by reference
Cristina: in that case you worked with euro standards body after they had the mandate
<Ralph> EN 301 549
Cristina: if possible to work more on the possible proposal of Ivan, before euro commission gives mandate
<jeff> https://www.essentialaccessibility.com/blog/en-301-549/
Cristina: it would be easier
and quicker
… how long do have REC track?
jeff: on first point
… we've put in some links on how wcag is referenced
… as far as how long it would take... we need to
charter first
… then it's a working group decision
Cristina: I have checked your links. You were involved after the mandate. A more complex process.
Ralph: we've used our fifteen minutes
<Zakim> garth, you wanted to say “yes, Ivan’s suggestion seems a good one”
garth: +1 to Cristina's +1
of Ivan's suggestion
… it seems reasonable
Ralph: what I'm hearing is that some subcommittee of Cristina, Ivan, Avneesh, and George could propose some text for the charter
ivan: the timing questions
of Cristina and Jeff
… when we start the formal process is not clear to me
… I don't see that happening before June
… in optimal case WG can start in September
… for the REC track process
… there is incompressible time of six or seven months
in any case because of IPR policy
… what I propose is not to publish REC, but to publish
CR earlier
… it's a strong message to say the a11y doc will be in
absolute sync with EPUB 3.X
… if we publish a REC earlier, the argument becomes
weaker--they can get out of sync
… CR means it's technically complete; we are just
testing with the community
… if we have that doc by next summer, we're in a good
place
Avneesh: epub a11y is
designed to work with any version of EPUB by design
… the timeline of development will depend on what
changes we want to make
… substantial changes would take more time
Cristina: if we have a clear
process and timeline, we can go back to the commission and explain
what we are doing
… they are committed to make the mandate for products,
we could ask them to wait for services
… the fact that the process is open is very important
<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to ask about "fixed layout improvements"
Ralph: what nature of work
might be useful as an early success
… wendyreid mentioned FXL
… but then Avneesh said [the EPUB A11Y spec] is not
version-specific
… Avneesh, George, Cristina--who's the right person to
work on language that would help
Avneesh: I'll help
Cristina: I'll help
George: this is language for the charter?
Ralph: yes
… there is some urgency because of timelines
Avneesh: what's our timeline? 1 week? 2 weeks?
Ivan: I would like to have
it in one week
… we need approval from w3m, from our own a11y people,
before going to AC
Action: Avneesh, George, Cristina, Ivan propose some text on EPUB A11y for the EPUB 3 WG charter
ivan: if we want to start in
September we need vote by June
… there is an orthogonal issue; we don't have comments
from non-Japanese publishers on the charter
Ralph: I though we had
Wiley's comment
… Avneesh, Ivan is eager to get this started
… this is important to get right
… next week is very busy for many of us
… but there's not an actual deadline
Cristina: we can work in a google doc
wendyreid: in agreement with
Ralph and Ivan
… to the people who are going to draft it, do whatever
you are comfortable with
… I can help get it into the charter in github
… we really need other publishers to comment on the
charter
Ralph: thanks everyone for taking the action about this
ivan: who takes the first shot at it?
Ralph: the four of you can decide
Garth: Liisa and Leslie... do they count?
(everyone) yes
Garth: let's give them an action to them to comment
Action: Garth to get Liisa and Leslie to respond
<Ralph> [adjourned]
<Ralph> dauwhe++