- From: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 12:01:15 +0000
- To: Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com>
- CC: Garth Conboy <garth@google.com>, "McCloy-Kelley, Liisa" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, Bill McCoy <bmccoy@w3.org>, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, Karen Myers <karen@w3.org>, "W3C Publishing Steering Committee" <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
I agree with Dave. While we want to make sure that there is publishing presence at TPAC, we also want to make sure that we don't silo ourselves off from other groups. It was a challenge last year to jump from the EPUB meetings to the ARIA meetings that I was supposed to be attending. Remote participation is essential for this community, especially the CG. Tzviya Sent from my iPad > On Apr 11, 2017, at 8:34 PM, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Garth Conboy <garth@google.com> wrote: >> Re EPUB CG meeting... yes,, and Ivan pointed out that CG meetings are >> generally just a couple of hours. So, it seems that would be potentially >> okay, overlapping with with Digital Publishing conference (but not the >> Publishing WG or DPUB BG). That's *if* we wanna have that much Publishing! >> :-) > > I want as many people as possible to participate in the community > group, and having F2F meetings is an excellent way to limit > participation to those with substantial amounts of time and money. > > As it is, TPAC is going to be a huge problem for those of us who are > in other working groups (CSS, HTML, WCAG, ARIA, etc.). If there are > going to be future publishing summits co-located with TPAC, I'd urge > that they be scheduled adjacent to rather than during TPAC. > > Dave >
Received on Friday, 14 April 2017 12:01:51 UTC