13:27:28 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pmwg
13:27:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/11/01-pmwg-irc
13:27:32 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:27:33 <Zakim> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group
13:27:40 <ivan> Chair: wendy
13:27:40 <ivan> Date: 2024-11-01
13:27:40 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Telco
13:27:40 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2024Oct/0000.html
13:54:19 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pmwg
13:56:17 <duga> duga has joined #pmwg
13:59:12 <shiestyle> shiestyle has joined #pmwg
13:59:14 <MasakazuKitahara> MasakazuKitahara has joined #pmwg
13:59:15 <ivan> present+
13:59:20 <ivan> present+ george
13:59:24 <toshiakikoike> toshiakikoike has joined #pmwg
13:59:25 <ivan> present+ brady
13:59:30 <MasakazuKitahara> present+
13:59:35 <toshiakikoike> present+
13:59:36 <shiestyle> present+
13:59:43 <ivan> present+ wendy
13:59:43 <mgarrish> mgarrish has joined #pmwg
13:59:50 <George> George has joined #pmwg
14:00:19 <George> present+
14:00:26 <ivan> present+ avneesh
14:00:40 <AvneeshSingh> AvneeshSingh has joined #pmwg
14:00:56 <AvneeshSingh> present+
14:01:25 <duga> present+
14:01:28 <wendyreid> present+
14:02:41 <George> George has joined #pmwg
14:03:23 <ivan> present+ charles
14:03:38 <CharlesL2> CharlesL2 has joined #pmwg
14:03:48 <duga> scribe+
14:03:51 <CharlesL2> present+
14:04:06 <mgarrish> present+
14:04:41 <George> George has joined #pmwg
14:05:02 <ivan> present+ ben_dugas
14:05:21 <duga> wendyreid: Welcome Ben
14:05:51 <duga> Ben: At Kobo for a long time, I lead the rendering side of things
14:06:01 <duga> ... we have a few
14:06:35 <duga> ... I used to be on these calls, then wandered off as I wasn't contributing, but Wendy talked me into coming back
14:06:41 <George> George has joined #pmwg
14:07:15 <duga> ... I may also get someone more technical to join
14:07:26 <duga> ... I am mostly interested in webtoons and related
14:07:48 <wendyreid> https://w3c.github.io/publ-maintenance-wg-charter/
14:07:56 <duga> wendyreid: We are back into rechartering
14:08:51 <duga> ... there have been some modifications
14:08:58 <George> George has joined #pmwg
14:09:09 <duga> ... content hasn't changed much, mostly wordsmithing
14:09:54 <duga> ... new scope has webtoons, annotations, a11y, some fixed layout properties, some script/wasm stuff, and a sprinkle of future things
14:10:19 <duga> ... biggest change is a11y of comics/manga has changed to broader fixed layout
14:10:30 <duga> ... This will be EPUB 3.4
14:10:45 <wendyreid> https://github.com/w3c/publ-maintenance-wg-charter/issues/37
14:10:47 <wendyreid> q?
14:11:15 <duga> ... some outstanding issues
14:11:41 <wendyreid> q?
14:11:46 <ivan> q+
14:11:47 <George> q+
14:11:49 <duga> ... Start with accessibility - is there anything else we need, particularly with an eye toward upcoming legislation
14:11:51 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:12:37 <duga> ivan: To clarify, we have a scope item that says work with the Publishing CG a11y grouo
14:12:46 <wendyreid> ack George
14:12:55 <wendyreid> s/grouo/group/
14:12:57 <duga> ... but do we need to add any specific language
14:13:36 <duga> George: US legistlation may require some metadata, but no change needed
14:14:18 <Ben> Ben has joined #pmwg
14:14:22 <duga> wendyreid: from Avneesh, there was a comment about looking at gaps
14:14:26 <AvneeshSingh> q+
14:14:34 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
14:14:36 <duga> ... do we want to consider an update to the crosswalk doc that includes title 2?
14:15:16 <duga> AvneeshSingh: We have been discussing with a similar table would be nice or not, we did decide we need to do some gap analysis, but may not want to be a crosswalk table
14:15:30 <duga> ... With title 2 it may be more of a strategic issue
14:15:47 <George> q+
14:15:56 <wendyreid> ack George
14:16:09 <ivan> q+
14:16:11 <mgarrish> q+
14:16:18 <duga> ... It would be good to mention whether we should do more of this work in the CG or add a note from the WG (mention in charter)
14:16:33 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:16:40 <duga> George: It would really help adoption to have better communication, not much of a spec issue
14:16:57 <duga> ivan: I propose we add something to the charter, but it may not be rec track work
14:17:27 <duga> ... Maybe in the first block of scopes say we will look at legislation and consider a note or changes to the spec
14:17:36 <duga> ... for political reasons that is a good idea
14:17:54 <duga> ... we need links to the various legislation
14:18:23 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:18:24 <duga> ... can someone send me that info? EU, US, maybe Canada? And mention Japan and India if they have anything
14:18:59 <duga> mgarrish: Second Ivan. Getting into legislation is a bad thing to do in spec. It should be notes, etc that aren't on the rec track
14:19:10 <duga> ... Probably shouldn't be in epub a11y
14:19:37 <duga> wendyreid: Agree. I can try and put together some text. We might not even reference them explicitly by name
14:19:56 <duga> ... exhaustive list will be hard
14:20:08 <duga> AvneeshSingh" Maybe just EAA as an example
14:20:10 <duga> wendyreid
14:20:12 <wendyreid> https://github.com/w3c/publ-maintenance-wg-charter/issues/31
14:20:25 <duga> wendyreid: Issue 31, mentioning epubcheck
14:20:45 <CharlesL2> S/just EAA/just EAA and Title II
14:20:58 <duga> ... We will need changes in epubcheck if we change the spec, so we need to refer to epubcheck somehow
14:20:58 <ivan> q+
14:21:01 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:21:40 <duga> ivan: We had it as an extra exit requirement, basically epubcheck must support epub 3.3
14:21:58 <duga> ... So adding that is easy, but are we shooting ourselves in the foot?
14:22:07 <duga> ... Will there be enough work on it?
14:22:32 <duga> ... there are some complex issues for it (annotations)
14:22:36 <duga> q+
14:22:39 <wendyreid> ack duga
14:22:41 <wendyreid> scribe+
14:22:47 <AvneeshSingh> q+
14:22:52 <wendyreid> duga: I don't know what the current state of funding is?
14:23:00 <George> q+
14:23:08 <wendyreid> ... I remember contributing, and asking organization, but I don't know where that stands
14:23:14 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
14:23:48 <duga> AvneeshSingh: In the previous charter it was there because we had the fundraising going, but at this point I don't see anyone raising funds
14:24:07 <duga> ... We have reached out to w3c for funding, but no response yet
14:24:16 <George> q-
14:24:32 <duga> ... There is no guarantee. We need a proper project if we add it as exit criteria
14:24:46 <ivan> q+
14:24:49 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:24:49 <duga> ... we could add it as a "will work with the maintainers"
14:25:01 <duga> ... and send to steering committee
14:25:15 <duga> ivan: I did not understand, is there a separate task force
14:25:33 <duga> AvneeshSingh: Yes, we made a TF when we joined w3c
14:25:39 <duga> ivan: I had no idea
14:25:46 <duga> AvneeshSingh: Maybe ask Romain
14:26:24 <duga> ivan: Currently I don't think we should add it. Let's talk to the steering committee, etc, first
14:26:59 <duga> ivan: I will update the issue
14:27:20 <ivan> q+
14:27:24 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:27:39 <duga> wendyreid: Anything else?
14:27:43 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues/481#issuecomment-2440853261
14:27:50 <duga> ivan: Yes, a PR, not an issue
14:28:05 <duga> ... There is a required review
14:28:35 <duga> ... The PR has approvals from 4 people, including the w3c security reviewer
14:28:49 <duga> ... but I like to leave it open for a little while
14:29:26 <duga> ... This is just some blanket language about security issues that may be raised, we promise to look at it
14:29:59 <duga> ... I would like to merge, objections?
14:30:03 <duga> wendyreid: Not from me
14:30:11 <duga> ivan: Ok, I will merge it
14:30:47 <duga> ... I would like to close without further action the TDM issue
14:31:11 <duga> ... I was wondering if there was anything to add, it seems to me the answer is no
14:31:37 <George> q+
14:31:41 <wendyreid> ack George
14:32:03 <duga> ... Ok, I will close it since there are no objections
14:32:16 <duga> George: Is there anything we need to be thinking about with metadata?
14:32:48 <AvneeshSingh> q+
14:32:49 <duga> ... We have the xwalk, is there any other metadata, particularly a11y, we need to add? And is it in scope?
14:32:51 <mgarrish> q+
14:33:09 <duga> ivan: If you are talking about new metadata vocabs, then it is out of scope
14:33:28 <duga> ... If you are talking about references, none of those things are normative and can be done now anyway
14:33:38 <duga> ... so I don't know what we would add
14:33:45 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
14:33:55 <duga> George: So if we want to add values to schema that is out of scope for us
14:33:59 <duga> ivan: yes
14:34:40 <ivan> q+
14:34:41 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:34:41 <duga> AvneeshSingh: There are some vocabs we created. Is such an addition of epub domain vocab in scope or not?
14:34:57 <ivan> q-
14:35:16 <duga> mgarrish: We have some metadata, that is what some of the text in the charter is about
14:35:21 <ivan> q+
14:35:29 <CharlesL2> q+
14:35:32 <duga> ... We could incubate something, but not add it to the charter now
14:35:42 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:35:48 <duga> AvneeshSingh: Q: if something comes in, can we add it? Sounds like yes
14:36:10 <duga> ivan: There is an explicit out of scope section, which includes vocab
14:36:29 <duga> ... I just copied it from the last version, I don't know why we had it at all
14:36:50 <duga> ... some make sense (e.g. DRM), but I don't know where that comes from
14:36:58 <wendyreid> q+
14:37:27 <wendyreid> ack CharlesL2
14:37:28 <duga> ... we could just remove the new metadata vocabs from out of scope and we are fine
14:37:33 <wendyreid> ack CharlesL
14:37:49 <duga> CharlesL2: I agree. We may also need to add more metadata with the new fixed layout work
14:37:58 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
14:38:21 <duga> wendyreid: In mentioning the out of scope section, I agree the new metadata stuff doesn't need to be there
14:38:42 <duga> ... we also have something about things that impact viewports
14:38:44 <duga> q+
14:39:02 <wendyreid> ack duga
14:39:26 <wendyreid> duga: I assume that's there because of the pain we experienced from our custom CSS properties and this is our promise to the world we'll never do it again
14:39:39 <ivan> q+
14:39:57 <wendyreid> ... I noticed it as well, it's very vague, we can get around it by saying "we needed to", and removing it feels like removing our promise to the CSS working group
14:40:12 <wendyreid> ... I think we can leave it, we have ways around it when we need it
14:40:15 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:40:52 <duga> ivan: Echoing that, that bullet and the previous one was an answer to some people who say we don't need epub at all
14:41:03 <duga> ... We do get those types of remarks
14:42:04 <duga> wendyreid: Anything else?
14:42:19 <duga> ivan: I proposed two to be closed, both refer to dpub aria
14:42:30 <duga> ... I propose closing because it isn't in our scope
14:42:54 <duga> ... and not something we want to take over (aria wg has taken that over)
14:43:05 <AvneeshSingh> q+
14:43:06 <duga> George: Should they go to CG?
14:43:33 <duga> ivan: I would think since these are so specific they need to go to aria wg
14:44:01 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
14:44:08 <duga> mgarrish: We propbably need a new tf. I don't think that group can move on those at this point
14:44:41 <duga> AvneeshSingh: We have an official liason, what we need to do is create strong use cases so we can push it in the aria wg
14:44:50 <duga> ... that is all we really need to do
14:45:22 <George> q+
14:45:43 <wendyreid> ack George
14:45:51 <duga> wendyreid + AvneeshSingh: Better to come through WG rather than CG
14:46:48 <duga> George: One attribute was "exercise", would it be good for the cg (wg?) to work on an interactive question/answer mechanism
14:46:56 <ivan> q+
14:46:59 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:47:01 <duga> ... clearly it is something the industry needs
14:47:13 <duga> ivan: Reminds me of edupub
14:47:33 <duga> ... I think it would be premature for the wg, it requires a lot of incubation
14:48:14 <duga> ... The right thing is to get a TF in the CG going, just like a11y group
14:48:28 <duga> ... then in a few years bring it back to the wg
14:48:52 <duga> ... But needs some strong leadership
14:49:32 <CharlesL2> q-
14:49:58 <duga> CharlesL2: When will we start voting on the charter?
14:50:21 <duga> ivan: Need horizontal review, we have 2 (international and security)
14:50:28 <duga> ... may be a few weeks for the others
14:50:47 <duga> ... so charter to AC in mid Dec? Or hold to Jan 1
14:51:09 <duga> ... which means if there are no formal objections, then the new charter would start in Feb
14:51:22 <duga> CharlesL2: APA has some potential additions
14:52:34 <duga> ivan: The sooner the better, since it is being actively reviewed
14:52:46 <duga> AvneeshSingh: I don't expect many surprises
14:53:08 <CharlesL2> CharlesL2 has left #pmwg
14:53:09 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:53:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/11/01-pmwg-minutes.html ivan