Re: About formal objections to the PWG Charter

> On 20 Apr 2017, at 03:55, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I've been reading through Daniel Glazman's comment on the charter [1],
> as well as the subsequent email thread started by Garth [2]
> 
> I think the underlying concern is about how constrained the Publishing
> Working Group will be by the charter, by the Web Publications and UCR
> documents, and by the Publishing Business Group itself. Working groups
> exist to make the technical decisions necessary for a standard, but
> this case is unusual because of DPUB's prior work, and the new
> structures imposed by the IDPF combination.
> 

Yes, I agree.

> I think there's also some concern about the multiple profiles of web
> publications being talked about. Why we need WP, PWP, *and* EPUB4 as
> separate specifications is perhaps not obvious, both to those who
> haven't followed the discussions, and to some that have.
> 

We may have to reinforce the text. Help:-)


> Perhaps we can communicate that the DPUB documents are non-normative,
> only serve as inputs to the PWG, and that the PWG will have the final
> say on technical matters.

We have already started to offer changes in this direction by changing the title of the DPUB IG document and close them as Notes asap. I believe that should be done in any case. Any other change you think should be done in the charter?


> Keep in mind that the new WG may have a
> broader spectrum of members, and a different consensus may be found
> than in DPUB.

Absolutely

Ivan


> 
> Dave
> 
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2017AprJun/0031.html
> 
> [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publishingbg/2017Apr/0022.html
> 


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