W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > December 2016

RE: Draft Charter seems to required that the IDPF and W3C plans go through...

From: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 16:14:50 +0000
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Bill McCoy <bmccoy@idpf.org>
CC: "DPUB mailing list (public-digipub-ig@w3.org)" <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <SN1PR0201MB161571889C50F768B30DFAF1D5870@SN1PR0201MB1615.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Leonard,

We do plan to have a discussion on Monday, but you’ll also note that the document includes information about how to submit comments: Raise an issue on GitHub [1], or contact the editor, Ivan Herman (which is a round-about way of raising issues on GitHub).

We, of course, welcome feedback, but this is in its very earliest stages, so you may want to hear some of the discussion first.

[1] https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/issues

Tzviya Siegman
Information Standards Lead

From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 11:07 AM
To: Bill McCoy
Cc: DPUB mailing list (public-digipub-ig@w3.org)
Subject: Re: Draft Charter seems to required that the IDPF and W3C plans go through...

Very glad to hear that the combination is looking positive but as you note, it’s not a done deal as yet nor is the IP transfer.  As such, I would think that (if nothing else), a statement about the assumptions be made clear in the Draft Charter.

And Charles, to your comment:
I absolutely believe that should the combination not happen (though I hope it does), the WG would continue!   The DPUB work started long before the two groups were (at least publically) talking about merger – so why wouldn’t it continue without it (should it not happen)??

Question to Tzviya – how do you want additional comments on the Draft Charter?   Email?  Wait till Monday?  Other?


From: Bill McCoy <bmccoy@idpf.org<mailto:bmccoy@idpf.org>>
Date: Friday, December 9, 2016 at 10:48 AM
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>>
Cc: "DPUB mailing list (public-digipub-ig@w3.org<mailto:public-digipub-ig@w3.org>)" <public-digipub-ig@w3.org<mailto:public-digipub-ig@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Draft Charter seems to required that the IDPF and W3C plans go through...

Leonard you are right regarding these assumptions.

As far as what the IDPF membership will "allow" of course nearly 90% voted in favor of the combination, but the IDPF Board must still approve definitive agreements which have not yet been finalized and for any number of reasons it is possible that the combination might not happen.

There is no scenario contemplated where the EPUB IP would not be transferred to W3C if the combination happens. Of course it's possible that the EPUB IP could be transferred to W3C without the organizational combination being completed but that would not materially change the draft charter assumptions and anyway that is not the plan that has already been approved by both organizations.

The MOU that was approved by both organizations specifies a deadline of January 28, 2017 for the combination and IP transfer. If the deadline was 8 months away that would be another matter, but  I think it would be a waste of time to spend effort now on anything else than the assumption that the combination (which includes the IP transfer) has happened already (i.e. by the time this is an actual charter proposal it can be assumed to have already happened)..

But an explicit statement about this assumption should probably be in the early draft.

Alternatively the DPUB IG could decide to suspend discussion about the prospective charter until next month.

But trying to either have the charter ignore or come up with hypothetical alternatives to something that's been approved and is expected in a month would seem unreasonable to me (even if I was a disinterested party, which obviously I am not).


On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 7:33 AM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote:
Many parts of the current (very early) Draft Charter are tied to the assumptions that

(a)     the combination of the two organizations will complete

(b)     the IDPF membership will allow the transition of EPUB3 to W3C

It seems to me that since neither of those is a fait accompli, we should not be building our charter around them.  Either that, or the charter should clearly spell out alternatives in the case that one or both fail to happen.



Bill McCoy
Executive Director
International Digital Publishing Forum (IDPF)
email: bmccoy@idpf.org<mailto:bmccoy@idpf.org>
mobile: +1 206 353 0233

Received on Friday, 9 December 2016 16:15:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:36 UTC