Re: late incoming: Publishing@W3C Summit Theme

I do like some of Dave’s suggestions for presentation topics.  And whether they are things that we address at the Summit or in publications we work on together leading up to that, they are some of the gorillas in the room that need addressing.

I think the “From Here to Eternity” concept of how we move from here to there is a really important one. Most of the people I have talked to in trade publishing think that we figured out ebooks. We’re done (ish). They are just another format, like mass market was. They have a really hard time conceiving of how a book lives in the world of the web and has to be maintained over time. Someone in-house recently suggested to me that we need to stop including any URLs in our books- print or e, because links die and are not stable enough to depend on.  That is not a good idea in the world we live in today. Research happens online. References refer to things online. We have to adapt to that.

And as for the audio bit- there is an audio-only ebook format. It’s called EPUB. But no one makes it and no one sells it because the major player in this market isn’t asking for it and the little guys aren’t going to ask for something special, even if it makes for a better consumer experience. We need to find someone to put that stake in the ground. And why more of the long form synced stuff doesn’t exist is that audio books are 1- published with their own agreements and terms from print and 2- are rarely the exact same set of words (we had to re-record and then fix over 180 errors to get an exact match for our interactive Pride & Prejudice) and 3- it’s a lot of processor power to manage long-form synced content and pagination and highlighting from a reading system perspective. So, there are business reasons, content reasons and development reasons why this isn’t a bigger thing. But that is worth discussing, right?



From: Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com<mailto:dauwhe@gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 7:14 PM
To: Bill McCoy <bmccoy@w3.org<mailto:bmccoy@w3.org>>
Cc: Cristina Mussinelli <cristina.mussinelli@aie.it<mailto:cristina.mussinelli@aie.it>>, "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>>, "PBG Steering Committee (Public)" <public-publishing-sc@w3.org<mailto:public-publishing-sc@w3.org>>, Karen Myers <karen@w3.org<mailto:karen@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: late incoming: Publishing@W3C Summit Theme
Resent-From: <public-publishing-sc@w3.org<mailto:public-publishing-sc@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 7:15 PM

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Cristina Mussinelli <cristina.mussinelli@aie.it<mailto:cristina.mussinelli@aie.it>> wrote:

I agree and, on the basis of the experience we have had in Italy while organizing Editech, I also suggest to add some more partecipative and interactive sessions, where participants can discuss and confront on specific topics in a structured way.

I believe the conference should also be an opportunity for us to listen and gather information and suggestions from the people attending, in many cases as skilled and knowledgeable in the field, as many of the speakers.

It came become an occasion to have inputs to better define the priorities of the Business Group.

Yes, yes, yes! This is a great idea!

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:58 PM, Bill McCoy <bmccoy@w3.org<mailto:bmccoy@w3.org>> wrote:

 IF we find we can have multiple breakouts then something more interactive would IMO be more practical than if we are 200+ people in one room most or all of the 1.5 days.


I don't think a single room is incompatible with interactivity. How about having a series of panels... maybe four or five people on the panel, with brief opening statements (ideally provided in advance to the audience) framing an issue. But then proceed with the audience questioning and commenting. This could happen in a larger room.

I just don't see much value in a series of presentations. Our problem isn't that we have various bits of information which other people don't have, and if only they heard us speak it would all be better. Our problem is that we need an engaged community to acknowledge and discuss complex issues. Listening to them will be more productive than lecturing to them.

Some ideas for panels:

[1] The Shock of the New. How can the ebook community respond to proprietary features introduced in dominant platforms? How do we react to requests from Amazon to not use features that have been part of EPUB and the web for decades? How do we react when they add features that EPUB doesn't support?

[2] The Lowest Common Denominator. Is there, in fact, a subset of EPUB3 that's supported everywhere? We all spend immense effort navigating an ecosystem where so few things just work. How can we get to an interoperable world, where we can depend on both the spec and the implementations?

[3] From Here to Eternity. How do we get from EPUB 3 to web books, while keeping our jobs and staying in business? What would such a transition look like? How do discontinuities in the ebook world relate to the commandment "don't break the web"?

[4] EPUB 2027. What would digital books look like in ten years? What do we imagine we could create with the full open web platform, unlimited JS, PWAs, web payments, and all the cool stuff?

[5] Can You Hear Me Now? Audio books are a growing market segment, and a natural fit with Publishing@w3c's roots in accessibility. Should there be an audio-only ebook format? Is there a market for reflowable ebooks with synced audio? Why don't more reading systems support reflowable + audio?

Dave