W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > April 2015

Meeting minutes, 2014-04-27

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 07:05:26 +0200
Message-Id: <7E42393F-5098-48D9-B099-79472EC99643@w3.org>
To: W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
The meetings are on the Web:


Text version below.

Thanks to Dave for scribing



      [1] http://www.w3.org/

            Digital Publishing Interest Group Teleconference

27 Apr 2015


      [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Apr/0098.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/27-dpub-irc


          Charles LaPierre (clapierre), Tzviya Siegman (Tzviya),
          Rob Sanderson (azaroth), Ivan Herman (Ivan), Phil Madans
          (philm), Markus Gylling (Markus), Bill Kasdorf
          (Bill_Kasdorf), Laura Dawson (LDawson), Dave Cramer
          (dauwhe), Deborah Kaplan (deborahGU), Laura Fowler
          (lfowler), Patrick Keating (pkeating), Mike Miller
          (MikeMiller), Vladimir Levantovsky (Vlad), Alan Stearns
          (astearns, Nick Ruffilo (NickRuffilo), Karen Myers
          (Karen_Myers), Tim Cole (TimCole), Peter Krautzberger
          (pkra), Paul Belfanti (pbelfanti), Ben De Meester
          (bjdmeest), Bert Bos (Bert), Jeff Xu (zhengxu)

          Brady Duga, Ayla Stein, David Stroup, Julie Morris,
          Heather Flanagan

          Tzviya Siegman

          Dave Cramer


     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]STEM Survey
         2. [6]Fragment ID-s
         3. [7]HTML5 + Footnote
     * [8]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 27 April 2015

   <tzviya> agenda

      [9] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Apr/0098.html

   <tzviya> [10]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/20-dpub-minutes.html

     [10] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/20-dpub-minutes.html

   tzviya: let's look at last week's minutes
   ... motion to accept?
   ... minutes approved.
   ... today's agenda


     [11] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Apr/0098.html

STEM Survey

   pkra: first look at survey
   ... 34 responses
   ... sent to 93 people
   ... ok result, but not too exciting
   ... people don't feel qualified to answer
   ... good coverage on all questions
   ... 37 questions total
   ... there's an unsurprising bias towards math
   ... partly due to me leading the survey
   ... lots of people talked about mathml
   ... it wasn't a random sample
   ... run through a few of the questions
   ... first section was about background
   ... bias towards CS and math
   ... 2nd was professional background
   ... didn't have a lot of aggregators
   ... most people were researchers
   ... researchers were primary audience
   ... we forgot to ask about students as audience
   ... which platforms people serve
   ... a few comments pointed to "the web is our platform"
   ... most people were focusing on desktop
   ... on the low end was print and ebooks
   ... next section was about content
   ... subject domains
   ... the question about reusing content was unclear
   ... "were people actively reusing content"
   ... prev. q was about making content resuable
   ... so people just repeated answer
   ... there was q about standardization
   ... there will be fun quotes from that


     [12] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/64149/DPUB-STEM-2014-12/results

   pkra: next section about authoring
   ... there were a couple of problems
   ... first question didn't get responses we wanted
   ... should have asked explicitly about STEM fragments
   ... want to know why people lose information when converting
   ... but questions were too vague
   ... people talked about transformation of text formats
   ... surprised to hear people do version control, did mention
   things like git
   ... "we see more and more JSON in scholarly publishing"
   ... that was unexpected answer to STEM fragment storage
   ... and very positive

   ivan: are some formats other than MathML that are widely used?

   pkra: one question asked that
   ... not at this point
   ... alas, I don't have all the data in my head :)

   tzviya: question 21, maybe?

   pkra: yes, 21
   ... CML
   ... there isn't that much
   ... someone from Wolfram had CDS
   ... not as much as I'd hoped
   ... in the authoring section
   ... Q15, how do people provide access to content fragments
   ... that was a good result
   ... people are used to using XML
   ... next section on delivery
   ... how is content delivered
   ... HTML was ahead of PDF
   ... 32% to 26%
   ... most produce both
   ... there was an open question about desired methods
   ... with ten longer comments
   ... Q about migrating away from PDF
   ... people said Yes
   ... not enthusiastic about PDF but said they have to
   ... Q about exposing data on web
   ... answers were all over the place
   ... Q about embedding scientific data via attributes,
   microdata, etc.
   ... quite a bit of stuff there

   tzviya: more summary would be good

   pkra: we didn't mention stem fragments again when asking about
   bridging reading and authoring
   ... lots of fun quotes about reading
   ... the workflow section was tricky to write
   ... similarly solid in results, no surprises but good data
   ... PDF comes up because we have to
   ... a11y section I haven't looked at much
   ... that was a challenging section
   ... more answers about people not having expertise or answers

   tzviya: I have a few questions
   ... first
   ... everyone should read through this even if STEM isn't your
   ... thanks PKRA!
   ... so what do we do next? There's a lot of information here,
   and it's all over the place
   ... might be helpful to focus on a few points and go from there

   pkra: one challenge is to extract data in efficient way to
   ... yes, it's a lot, and it's not clear what to focus on
   ... a meeting of task force will help
   ... to get an in-depth summary
   ... original idea was to publish a note by the IG
   ... but the input in some sections is not viable
   ... for example, a11y is not balanced enough to provide good

   tzviya: if we try to write a note summarizing everything, it
   would be huge

   pkra: would be good to make data available in anonymized

   ivan: I've already produced a spreadsheet
   ... so I can just remove a column

   pkra: yes, but maybe that's a different conversation
   ... I had trouble with the spreadsheet
   ... Ivan, is it legally possible to publish data?

   ivan: if it's anonymous, then it's not a problem

   <astearns> not just names, but any identifying details in
   free-form responses

   pkra: then the note can be much more focused
   ... it's all anecdotal

   Bill_Kasdorf: while the anon. data are useful, what's most
   important are the messages
   ... sometimes they're clear and sometimes they're contradictory
   ... don't need to cover all issues equally
   ... what did we hear that was notable?

   pkra: I agree

   tzviya: OK. Any other comments?

   ivan: You also need people around you?

   pkra: I will rely on the task force, but more people will be

   ivan: if anyone in the group has some experience in managing
   survey results, volunteer!

   pkra: I'm also not experienced

   NickRuffilo: I've done this
   ... if you have any questions about creating non-leading
   questions or analyzing results, please let me know
   ... I'll pull up articles I've written about this

   tzviya: NickRuffilo is our new favorite

   Bill_Kasdorf: too much reliance on statistical analysis would
   be suspect due to the small and biased sample

   Bill_Kasdorf: more an editorial task

   <NickRuffilo> Excel TIPS:

     [13] http://publishingperspectives.com/2013/01/tips-for-technologists-7-excel-with-excel/

   Karen: do I have confidence this is not public, just
   members-only? I don't think raw results should be public

   ivan: we can check

   pkra: it's always asked me to log in

   ivan: it's not public

   Karen: OK. If there's a quote, it will not be attributed?
   ... more a qualitative report

   ivan: it should never be quoted or attributed

   pkra: most people would be OK with that

   tzviya: we've never asked permission to quote people
   ... we have our existing STEM task force, and Nick has been

   <pkra> or otherwise shanghai you ;-)

   Karen: we have a replacement AC rep for Copyright Clearance
   center, who may be interested in STEM

   tzviya: thanks Karen.
   ... moving on...

Fragment ID-s

   tzviya: a few weeks ago there was a discussion about fragment


     [14] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Apr/0051.html

   tzviya: which ended up on the annotations list
   ... Ivan will lead us through this

   tzviya: lots of discussion on what makes a legal identifier

   ivan: is rob around?
   ... we discussed that three weeks ago that the model for
   selectors in open annotations document
   ... is in fact a very rich and powerful collection of terms

   <tzviya> ivan: perhaps starting with position of the selection
   model in open annotation is a good

   <tzviya> ...not bound to one media type

   <tzviya> ...the model is an abstract model, not described in
   terms of URI

   <tzviya> ...perhaps it's possible to turn it into fragment ID

   <tzviya> ...then there was further discussion of when a frag ID
   is legal, etc

   <tzviya> Rob's position:

     [15] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Apr/0054.html

   ivan: the fundamental issue is the following
   ... a fragment identifier is bound to a specific media type
   ... you must register for each and every media type
   ... so you can't just declare the OA model for the entire world
   ... if we go down that route and use the selector model
   ... the correct way is we define them as part of a URI
   ... and then we register them for some of the media types for
   which they are useful
   ... html, svg, etc.
   ... we can do that
   ... then it can be combined with other mechanisms as it's done
   with web packaging
   ... it's not clear to me who should work on this
   ... I have the impression that there's some sort of agreement
   that if we restrict by media types we can do this
   ... azaroth, is this a fair summary?

   azaroth: yes, that's it

   Bill_Kasdorf: keeping in mind the mission of the various groups
   ... DPUB is expressing needs, not writing standards
   ... I have a strong interest in what Anno WG comes up with
   ... as far as DPUB, our job is to surface the issue and work
   with the appropriate WG
   ... the OA model you recommended came out of a CG
   ... I'm not trying to wash my hands of it

   ivan: I understand and agree
   ... two comments
   ... we already do this approach with structural semantics where
   we're involved with PF
   ... the other thing is that we need to recharter this group
   ... maybe we can then go beyond what we have here
   ... we'll see where it goes after September


     [16] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-annotation-minutes.html

   TimCole: it was discussed at Anno F2F a bit
   ... if this is important to DPUB
   ... you need to push Anno WG
   ... talked about in context of rangefinder
   ... but it's not high on our priority list
   ... might be good to bring this up as collaborative
   ... the anno model allows lots of selectors
   ... not all will work as fragment identifiers
   ... also, EPUB already has something that kind of works

   ivan: I agree

   tzviya: we all are talking about epub cfi as if it solves the
   issues, but few people use it
   ... there are too many options
   ... it's still a multiple choice question
   ... i can use xpointer, I can use CFI, but what happens with
   packaging and building systems and epubweb
   ... those urls look like multi-part mime
   ... so maybe we should get used to those semicolons in URI

   ivan: for me, the packaged uris don't look that funny
   ... if you combine with packaging, what is done in the
   packaging spec is what should be done

   <clapierre1> looks like Readium supports the EPUB CFI

     [17] https://github.com/readium/readium-cfi-js

   ivan: we are getting into technical discussions
   ... good topic for f2f
   ... we should have clear and clean idea of pros and cons of CFI
   ... it's in the same space as the selectors
   ... CFI provides you with a fragment ID
   ... is CFI was completely useful then the package spec approach
   combined with CFI and we are done
   ... so we need to have a clear idea in NY whether CFI works, or
   it does not work
   ... if it does not work, we need to look at alternatives

   Bill_Kasdorf: don't want to conflict with anno

HTML5 + Footnote

   tzviya: we followed offline with berjon and michael smith
   ... HTML will not have a formal proposal for an element, so we
   should pursue role with aria
   ... in the past, some roles have been promoted to element in
   ... so we're moving forward with ARIA role
   ... maybe HTML will take it up in the future

   TimCole: since most annos are third party
   ... there might be use cases where people mine footnotes as
   they mine annotations
   ... we should see how footnotes might be transformed into
   ... we should keep that in mind

   tzviya: we agree
   ... footnotes are somewhere in the middle of content and

   <azaroth> +1 :)

   tzviya: let us know if you're coming to the f2f


     [18] http://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/May_2015_F2F_Logistics_and_Details

   tzviya: see you next week

   <ivan> trackbot, end telcon

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version
    1.140 ([20]CVS log)
    $Date: 2015/04/28 04:59:43 $

     [19] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

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

Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 05:05:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:35:59 UTC