13:51:18 RRSAgent has joined #pbgsc 13:51:23 logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/09/13-pbgsc-irc 13:51:23 RRSAgent, make logs Public 13:51:24 Meeting: Publishing Steering Committee 13:51:33 chair: graham 13:51:42 present+ 13:52:31 present+ 13:52:56 present+ daihei, george, graham 13:53:19 Graham has joined #pbgsc 13:53:52 Daihei has joined #pbgsc 13:54:23 George has joined #pbgsc 13:54:46 present+ 13:55:51 wolfgang has joined #pbgsc 13:57:58 present+ wolfgang 13:58:21 AvneeshSingh has joined #pbgsc 13:58:47 liisamk has joined #pbgsc 13:59:03 present+ 13:59:24 Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pbgsc 13:59:29 present+ tzviya, wolfgang, avneesh, Bill_Kasdorf 13:59:41 my new email tzviya@w3.org 13:59:49 gautierchomel has joined #pbgsc 14:00:20 present+ 14:00:25 present+ 14:00:45 present+ shinya 14:00:56 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 14:01:11 regrets+ Rick 14:01:16 scribe+ 14:01:24 present+ 14:01:44 present+ Gautier 14:01:48 present+ gautier 14:01:57 present+ christina 14:02:29 agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishing-sc/2024Sep/0006.html 14:02:52 previous: @@prev@@ 14:03:01 topic: TPAC Updates 14:03:06 present+ leslie 14:03:13 https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/12a090ec-425d-4163-b14b-2fca1bb19fa4/ 14:03:23 Leslie has joined #pbgsc 14:03:31 Wendy: we have time planned in TPAC for a full-day meeting 14:03:56 ... the plan is to start the day by discussing whether to make substantial changes to EPUB and implications on charter updates 14:04:07 ... decision on web tunes and scrolled content 14:04:10 ... annotations 14:04:16 ... discussion on legislation and a11y 14:04:34 ... ADA updates, including talking about any remaining work we may want to do as a community 14:04:41 ... audio a11y and TTS 14:04:53 ... limited AOB time, but planning for a discussion on next steps for publishing an EPUB 3.3 14:04:59 ... and moving to ISO 14:05:01 q+ 14:05:03 ... or not 14:05:14 Graham: a fairly full day with some meaty topics 14:05:24 ... unfortunately I'm not able to attend 14:05:38 George: Janina from APA WG asked for my availability 14:05:54 ... APA WG wants to meet Tuesday morning with a topic on fixed layout and concerns they may have 14:06:03 Wendy: I think we have a scheduled time with APA in the calendar 14:06:16 ... I think on Friday 14:06:33 https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/35b794a5-23c7-47f1-adeb-09cc1537c402/ 14:06:34 ... yes, Friday at 1630; joint meeting 14:06:48 Ivan: that's in the official agenda as well 14:07:03 LIA13 has joined #pbgsc 14:07:11 Wendy: great that Janina is reaching out to George but please ask them also to reach out to Shinya and me 14:07:13 George: sure 14:07:15 q? 14:07:27 present+ 14:07:33 Liisa: should we encourage more people to come to TPAC? 14:07:37 Wendy: yes 14:07:39 q 14:07:42 q+ 14:07:50 ... I can send something with the agenda 14:08:07 Gautier: re: APA, I've been participating a bit in that group 14:08:26 ... I feel a lack of understanding [there] on what is in EPUB 14:08:49 ... beyond layout I think it's important that we use the joint meeting to provide them a better understanding and view of what is EPUB 14:09:05 Graham: the fundamental nature of EPUB or very specific questions? 14:09:08 q+ 14:09:21 Gautier: remind folk of the basics of EPUB 14:09:24 ... I've heard concerns about not being able to fix reading ordewr 14:09:28 s/dewr/der 14:09:46 ... outside of the EPUB WG sometimes people don't realize what is EPUB 14:09:58 There is an updated overview: https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-overview-33/ 14:10:11 ... APA in particular should have a good knowledge of this standard 14:10:15 q+ 14:10:22 Graham: that touches on outreach 14:10:30 Tzviya: this is helpful feedback, Gautier 14:10:43 ... it's also confusing as people in this group have worked with APA for years 14:10:58 ... it's a good opportunity to go and do an overview 14:11:07 ... it's not surprising they have questions about fixed layout 14:11:33 Graham: there's a mix of questions 14:11:49 ... is this going to be a joint meeting of the Publishing Activity folk and APA or specific people? 14:12:03 Wendy: officially it's a joint meeting of the Publishing Maintenance WG and APA 14:12:19 ... but we can extend the invitation to PubCG and PubBG participants who wish to attend 14:12:51 Graham: is there a process for doing a structured refresher on EPUB in that meeting or would you propose a separate meeting to do that outreach to help with the understanding? 14:13:10 Wendy: good question; we need to know what is not being understood 14:13:30 Graham: so you plan to use the meeting to explore what they need and deliver that later? 14:13:33 Wendy: [nods] 14:13:59 q+ 14:14:07 Ivan: we took some time to refresh the EPUB documents 14:14:18 ... this may be enough to give a high-level view of what EPUB is 14:14:22 https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-overview-33/ 14:14:25 ... perhaps Gautier could point APA to that 14:14:49 Avneesh: it is important to know who are the individuals who need to know more about EPUB 14:15:44 ... Janina and others have been so engaged in the EPUB world for a while, so it's a little surprising that there are some who need basic information 14:16:03 topic: New documents 14:16:14 Avneesh: 2.0 of the publishing metadata 14:16:26 ... and a complete rewrite of the guide 14:16:35 ... forwarded widely 14:16:46 ... I suggest you all look at the document and provide feedback 14:16:58 Principles: https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/2.0/principles/ 14:17:03 ... if we have to adjust our path, now is the best time to tell us 14:17:09 ONIX metadata techniques: https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/2.0/techniques/onix-metadata/index.html 14:17:10 ... ^^ Principles 14:17:18 EPUB accessibility metadata techniques: https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/2.0/techniques/epub-metadata/index.html 14:17:28 Issue tracker: https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues 14:17:33 ... and ^^ issue tracker 14:17:55 ... Rick Johnson and some others have volunteered to produce implementations 14:18:00 q+ 14:18:13 Graham: I was peripherally involved in some of the work on EPUB-A 14:18:20 ... it's a little closer to standardization 14:18:41 Liisa: the question that came up about whether we are going to have guidance on PDF or not ... 14:18:51 ... are we really going to develop guidance on PDF? 14:19:00 ... or are we going to pull that back to provide guidance elsewhere? 14:19:14 Avneesh: we have an action item to invite some of the PDF people to an upcoming call 14:19:28 ... the general mindset of the group is that we should include PDF if we can 14:19:46 ... we can explore the feasibility with the PDF folk in an upcoming call 14:20:11 Plus ONIX, of course! 14:20:18 Graham: it would be moderately useful to have the various relevant features of PDF displayed in the same way as the same features in EPUB, for consistency 14:20:39 Avneesh: we're exploring whether to include PDF; get a feel of the temperature of the room 14:20:53 George: I believe ONYX has an ability to present information about PDF documents 14:21:05 s/ONYX/ONIX 14:21:17 ... the internal metadata in a PDF about a11y needs the experts from that group to inform us what can be done 14:21:37 ... we need an expert to be able to come to more informed decisions 14:21:48 q+ 14:21:55 Graham: if there's a feature that is in both PDF and EPUB, ONIX uses the same code 14:22:10 ... where they implement an equivalent a11y feature we don't separate the codes 14:22:27 ... for unique features where we don't know of them, we do need an expert 14:22:58 ... guidelines to get consistency on display of equivalent items would be useful 14:23:11 Avneesh: should we do it or should we let others do it? 14:23:37 ... any strong feelings? e.g. about a PDF discussion within the A11Y TF 14:23:56 Liisa: I don't think it's wrong for us to try to help consumers to get consistent information 14:24:03 I think Duff has been in the loop, correct? 14:24:18 ... if nothing else it may help them to understand why they might want to buy something other than a PDF 14:24:39 ... and to help get better support in the industry for things that will help the workflow 14:24:47 q- 14:24:50 ... alt text in PDF is currently very challenging 14:25:13 Avneesh: thank you; we will continue to explore in this direction and hopefully have guidance for PDF also 14:25:41 George: the Vocabulary group updated their crosswalk with ONIX yesterday 14:25:57 ... one of the things we need is to get that crosswalk in front of the library MARC people 14:26:07 ... I'm trying to find those people 14:26:15 Avneesh: I can forward the announcement to those people 14:26:33 Graham: any pointers to the earlier versions of the crosswalk should update their pointers 14:26:48 To George: Please send me the link to that update as well. 14:26:52 topic: Suggestion to change Publishing Business Group to a Community Group 14:27:01 Graham: [see Ivan's email] 14:27:26 scribe+ 14:27:30 -> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishing-sc/2024Sep/0000.html Publishing BG becoming a CG?Publishing BG becoming a CG? 14:27:46 Ralph: [provides pointer to email] 14:27:55 ... I mentioned this in the July meeting, and somewhat in passing 14:28:02 ... I apologise for the surprise 14:28:16 ... Let me give some background about business groups and why we created them 14:28:21 ... and why it suits publishing 14:28:42 Ralph - some mention of the community group proposal in the July meeting but not widely documented. Ralph gives an overview of community and the group types 14:28:44 ... years ago when CGs were designed, it was clear that the proponents for CGs wanted them to be completely open 14:29:25 ... other activities said they would use them, but wanted forums where people have some buy-in or stake to be there 14:29:34 ... some will have more or less, but everyone has a stake 14:30:09 ... because of the nature of W3C, the way we chose to have people indicate their stake with formal participation was a fee 14:30:27 ... the fee varied by size of entity, from a single person to larger companies 14:31:14 ... some of the reasoning for fees based on organization size is to offset the cost of providing team resources to business groups 14:31:38 ... CGs do not officially get team support or resources, team members can participate if they want to but not support 14:31:45 ... BGs can request support 14:32:22 ... in return for filtering out those who just want to absorb information, and team support, there's a fee 14:33:16 ... the logistics of BGs has not proven effective for us 14:33:43 ... the reason I raised this in July, does this community, do you feel that there is a filtering function that is helping the BG or hurting the BG? 14:33:50 +q 14:33:52 ... are there people who ought to be participating that cannot 14:33:57 ... barred by the fee 14:34:29 ... or conversely, are there people who would interfere with the functioning of the BG if anyone can join? 14:34:50 ... there was a comment in the email thread about CGs being always technical 14:35:12 ... CGs can have a charter, that charter states what the role and purpose of the group is 14:35:34 ... there is no reason why the BG's discussions and content cannot be done in the CG context 14:36:05 ... the reason I raised it, was to reduce the administrative effort on W3C's part 14:36:25 ... I ask you to consider if the admin is supporting the goals of the BG or detracting from it 14:36:36 liisamk: There is only one other BG, they seem inactive 14:36:53 ... is there an interest from W3C to eliminate BGs altogether? 14:37:12 Ralph: We're exploring whether BGs serve the purpose we envisioned, if they don't, what do we do? 14:37:24 ... if they do, are their needs met by our current BG processes 14:37:24 q+ 14:38:02 ... last year there were proposals for 4 new BGs, the team evaluated them and met with the proposers, and made the mutual agreement that they didn't need that framework 14:38:13 ... we haven't closed any, we haven't opened new ones 14:38:27 ivan: They operate as CGs 14:38:45 Ralph: I need to check on where they ended up, as CGs or otherwise 14:39:05 cristina: Two more comments on the background 14:39:23 ... this started with the merger of W3C and IDPF 14:40:17 ... W3C could be for strategic advice, the idea of a business group, the people who have the knowledge of the business 14:40:44 q? 14:40:44 q+ to respond 14:40:45 cristina: The idea of a BG vs a CG, it's people with knowledge of the business, not the understanding of community 14:41:19 ... I think it's important who have interest, and pay, but may not have the money for full membership. 14:41:40 ... publishing is made up of a lot of small, medium, large enterprises, but we need to people with a real interest 14:41:56 ... people in the CG don't always have a strong business interest 14:42:03 ... they join for technology interest 14:42:12 ... or to share in the community aspect 14:42:41 ... my third point, my impression in the recent time, discussions in the BG, SC, WG, we closed the main goal we had, EPUB and metadata 14:42:50 ... what is missing is a clear idea of what to do next 14:43:15 ... where do we need to discuss? we first need an idea of what we want to discuss 14:43:52 ... we move people around, things have been scattered, if we need to make a choice we need to do it now 14:44:07 ... W3C has a new CEO, new Board, we need to re-assess 14:44:21 Graham: Many of the initial functions intended for the BG have ended up hre 14:44:31 ... what to determine is what the BG should do 14:44:41 cristina: We've discussed this as chairs of the BG too 14:44:46 ... too many discussion in too many places 14:45:00 ... who is where, there is a lot of overlap in people 14:45:20 ... SC started to organize the chairs, but now we're a different group 14:45:36 tzviya8: Cristina makes a lot of excellent points 14:45:41 ... we need to figure out what we're doing 14:45:46 ... more important than how 14:45:53 ... when we worked in IDPF, it was one big group 14:45:56 tzviya, you wanted to respond 14:46:03 ... one example, Rick looks at things from both business and tech 14:46:08 ... he is a useful person to have 14:46:19 ... we look at Rick in the WG because we need business expertise 14:46:20 q+ 14:46:32 ... a large part of what has been missing is this shared experience 14:46:39 ... the CG is floundering without BG experience 14:47:00 ... if we move away from BG, we should merge with the existing CG and combine the business and the technical 14:47:15 ... we used to have it, come up with the reason to do something, and then the technical solution 14:47:31 liisamk: That was the board, we'd come up with a problem and Markus would fix it 14:47:55 tzviya8: Japanese publishers have interests too, Daihei should cover that 14:48:18 Bill_Kasdorf: In the interest of not taking a position on the solution, relating to Ralph's comment on people having a stake in the game 14:48:28 ... one of our big problems is the dues structure 14:48:52 ... the aspect that is the biggest obstacle, paying on the basis of their size 14:48:59 +q 14:49:04 +1 to Bill! 14:49:20 ... there's a technical group within the organizations that would contribute to standards, that's an obstacle, it's a subset of the company that wants the stake 14:49:35 ... the dues structure forces the whole company 14:50:06 Graham: We've seen this issue in our org too, which is why we have a flat fee structure 14:50:22 q+ 14:51:01 liisamk: Part of the reason for wanting a BG was an onramp to transfer what they paid IDPF to join W3C 14:51:03 ack liisamk 14:51:07 ... it was a small increase 14:51:13 ... if we remove this, we take that away 14:51:25 q+ 14:51:26 ... it's either free or more money than they can afford 14:51:36 ack Ralph 14:51:45 Ralph: Thanks Cristina, Liisa, Tzviya for the background 14:51:56 ... we do have parallel conversations, and the background 14:52:17 ... that was what I hoped for by characterizing the business needs of a community 14:52:35 ... we remind the engineers, the WGs, to pay attention to the customers, the users 14:52:48 I'm going to allow 3 more minutes on this so we can ensure 5 mins for Liisa's AOB. The remainder of this subject can be transferred to e0mail and then discussed at the next meeting 14:52:51 ... the Publishing BG was meant to be the place where we ask the business needs of the industry 14:53:07 ... that work shouldn't be disconnected from business need 14:53:30 ... all of these conversations are crucial to what we do 14:53:41 ... how do we partition the conversations effectively 14:54:14 q- 14:54:23 ... the SC is the place where these conversations happen, but should be happening in the BG 14:54:30 q+ 14:54:40 ... if there are too many places with all the same people, where are the others 14:55:03 ... if there's technical folk in Editeur, Elsevier, are they showing any presence at all in places like the CG? 14:55:25 ... if there are people we feel should be participating, in any of the venues, are they there? 14:55:53 ... If its the same core people who are driving the conversations in all those places, maybe we don't need 4 places 14:56:08 q- 14:56:54 Bill_Kasdorf: I was very pleased to see Wendy's agenda for TPAC, it covers topics I want to see addressed! 14:57:21 Daihei: In Japan the ebook business has increased steadily, it's significant 14:57:29 ... the majority of publisher income 14:57:37 ... EPUB based ecosystem is crucial 14:57:56 ... the POV of management is to be concerned about where the discussion is happening, or its focus on growth 14:58:05 ... the Japanese Big 4, they are all full members 14:58:11 ... the industry org is a member 14:58:17 ... the key people are represented 14:58:33 ... their expectation is to seriously discuss our concerns and what is happening 14:58:39 ... what creates better business 14:58:49 ... to contribute to the growth of digital publishing 14:59:06 ... each company only sends their executives, or those in charge of digital publishing 14:59:29 ... since Ivan's email, I've exchanged emails with them, their concern is diluting the discussion with too many people 14:59:48 ... dedicated to serious discussion 15:00:16 [Daihei's point about senior level people is very much one of the things we had in mind when designing Business Groups] 15:00:37 cristina: We need to consider why we only have some people and some orgs, part of this is the time committment 15:00:50 +1 15:00:55 ... if we don't understand the reasoning for participation, people don't know why to join 15:01:19 ... there are lots of companies in W3C, do we have these problems in other sectors? 15:01:30 Graham: There's a lot of discussion to be had, we'll continue this in email 15:01:42 topic: AOB 15:01:53 Liisa: I want to remind us that we need to support Epubcheck 15:01:59 liisamk: We need to keep talking about continue support for EPUBCheck, someone please fix so it supports TDM 15:02:02 ... and we need to have epubcheck support TDM 15:02:17 ... currently epubcheck gives an Unrecognized Prefix error 15:02:25 Tzviya: please open an issue on epubcheck 15:02:55 Liisa: I'll do that but we need the support, TDM is coming soon 15:03:03 Avneesh: I hadn't heard this request 15:03:08 Tzviya: it should be an easy fix 15:03:16 ... if you can send an example file that would help 15:03:20 Liisa: I can do that 15:03:43 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:03:44 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/09/13-pbgsc-minutes.html ivan 15:03:51 zakim, end meeting 15:03:51 As of this point the attendees have been wendyreid, ivan, daihei, george, graham, wolfgang, liisamk, tzviya, avneesh, Bill_Kasdorf, Ralph, shinya, shiestyle, Gautier, christina, 15:03:54 ... leslie, LIA 15:03:54 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 15:03:55 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/09/13-pbgsc-minutes.html Zakim 15:04:02 I am happy to have been of service, Ralph; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 15:04:02 Zakim has left #pbgsc 15:05:36 s|@@prev@@|-> https://www.w3.org/2024/08/09-pbgsc-minutes.html 9-Aug 15:09:15 s/the SC is the place where these conversations happen, but should be happening in the BG/the SC has been the place where some of these conversations happen, but more of the business needs conversation should be happening in the BG 15:09:58 s/folk in Editeur, Elsevier/folk in Elsevier who want to participate in technical discussions 15:10:44 s/that work shouldn't be disconnected/the technical work shouldn't be disconnected 15:11:13 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/09/13-pbgsc-minutes.html Ralph 15:12:16 yep 16:39:17 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 16:53:56 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 17:33:47 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 18:24:42 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 18:38:13 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 19:20:28 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 19:38:02 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 20:18:07 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 20:37:13 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 20:54:43 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 21:13:09 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 21:33:44 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 22:16:20 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 22:32:55 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 22:50:23 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 23:30:08 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc 23:47:38 shiestyle has joined #pbgsc