Re: DPUB-ARIA exit criteria

I have created a separate dpub-cr branch, and have put some text into it, see

https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/dpub-cr/aria/dpub.html <https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/dpub-cr/aria/dpub.html>

I was not sure whether the reference to 3.1 is the correct one but, I presume, by the time this document will go to Rec, EPUB3.1 will be considered as a rec, too, so it should be fine. I hope the wording is fine, but I am sure Matt will be able to make it more readable!

Cheers

Ivan


> On 20 Oct 2016, at 23:55, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Following up on this email and today’s meeting:
> 
> 1.       Ivan, would you please clarify if this was based on a discussion with Ralph? To confirm, Ralph was OK with publisher/author implementation of either the DPUB-ARIA roles or their predecessors in epub:type vocabulary?
> 2.       Shane, what do you need from DPUB to arrange formal testing procedures?
> 3.       We need to document our exit criteria for CR. Our plan is to publish in mid-November. Michael has asked us for this documentation by 4 Nov (ideally) (really no later than 8 Nov). I have not worked on this sort of thing before. I assume, Ivan and Shane that you are pros.   Happy to help out.
> 
> Tzviya
> 
> Tzviya Siegman
> Information Standards Lead
> Wiley
> 201-748-6884
> tsiegman@wiley.com <mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>
> 
> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>]
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 11:40 AM
> To: Shane McCarron
> Cc: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken; Richard Schwerdtfeger; Michael Cooper
> Subject: Re: chat with Ralph
> 
> 
> On 29 Sep 2016, at 17:35, Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io <mailto:shane@spec-ops.io>> wrote:
> 
> I assume you meant "However, for this case *if* we cannot do that…"
> 
> Oops, sorry…
> 
> (Never send a mail while on a call…:-)
> 
> 
> 
> I can imagine a really simple web service that you could submit content to that would look for role values and tabulate them.  Ask for a little information to correlate the usage with the "user" (publisher).  Map the results against the terms in the document.
> 
> If there is interest in that, I will have someone throw it together.  That's what Spec-Ops is here for!
> 
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
> I have chatted with him on the (vocabulary) exit criteria. Bottom line:
> 
> - Ideally, we should indeed have, for each term, at least two publishers/authors who use that term. Not necessarily in absolute full production, but at least, as a start, in some preliminary uses
> - However, for this case, we cannot do that, we should have for each term, at least two publishers/authors that use the semantically equivalent epub:type value. Ie, if the only difference is syntax, then that should be fine.
> 
> Would that work?
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Technical Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153 <tel:%2B31-641044153>
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Shane McCarron
> Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Technical Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>

----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704