W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-publishing-sc@w3.org > November 2018

RE: Meeting times, structure, and alignment

From: George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 09:47:21 -0700
To: "'Ivan Herman'" <ivan@w3.org>, "'Liisa'" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>
Cc: "'Bill Kasdorf'" <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>, "'Rick Johnson'" <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>, "'W3C Publishing Steering Committee'" <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000601d479de$37d3e040$a77ba0c0$@montana.com>
Dear Chairs, which was the Steering Committee,
 
While Avneesh and I are not CG, WG or PBG  chairs, I suggest that accessibility perspectives be represented . We think of this as providing a horizontal review perspective.  Avneesh is chair of the accessibility TF and we suggest that Avneesh be the primary representative to this newly designed group, and I can help by being a secondary. Avneesh and I are 12 hours apart and with differing meeting times and demanding travel schedules having a backup should provide a consistent voice.
 
Love to hear your thoughts.
 
Best
George
 
From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> 
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2018 2:15 AM
To: Liisa <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>
Cc: Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>; Rick Johnson <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>; George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>; W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Meeting times, structure, and alignment
 
+1 to all what has been said.
 
The epubcheck may actually be a good example: it should be, in fact, the task of the BG to set that up, either via plenary calls or by a dedicated task force. It is not something that should be done by a separate Steering group; it is an action by the BG as a whole.
 
1. I do believe we need a chairs' task force, which is really aimed at "what happened/happens in the other groups" like thing, maybe yielding issues like "these and these groups may have to look at this issue together". This would include the chairs of the BG and the WG, obviously the EPUB3 CG, but possibly other CG-s that have been, or are in the process of being set up, like the BD/Comics/Manga CG[1], the Sync Media CG[2], or the Publishing CG[3].
 
We used to call these, in the old days, W3C Coordination Groups. They are not part of the W3C process any more (which does not have any "activities" as administrative entities any more) but, back when I was activity lead for Semantic Web I found our Coordination Group very useful. We had a weekly telco, though we often skipped a call when there was nothing particular to discuss, but we did keep it in our respective agendas. It was chaired by me, included ex officio all the chairs in the activity, although the chairs of the groups usually agreed among themselves who would be on the call to share the load (ie, if a group has three co-chairs, it is not necessary for all three to be at all calls).
 
We can adopt the same model, maybe not calling it Coordination Group (the abbreviation "CG" may be misleading…) but chairs' task force, chairs' town-hall meeting, or whatever… It should be chaired by the Publishing Champion; in the interim, while still waiting for a champion, should be chaired by Ralph (or maybe myself if he does not have the time).
 
2. I believe the chairs of the BG should have their own, separate meetings, just like the WG chairs have it on Wednesdays, where some BG specific issues are discussed and the agenda is set.
 
Whether we can remove the term 'Steering Committee' altogether is a separate question (Garth had some issues with this due to the merger agreement), but even if we keep the term we can certainly downplay it in favor of the, say, chairs' TF.
 
My 2 cents…
 
Cheers
 
Ivan
 
[1] https://www.w3.org/community/bdcomacg/
[2] https://www.w3.org/community/sync-media-pub/
[3] https://www.w3.org/community/publishingcg/



On 9 Nov 2018, at 19:05, George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com <mailto:kerscher@montana.com> > wrote:
 
+1 to Bill’s comment.
 
Best
George
 
 
From: Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com> > 
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2018 10:33 AM
To: Liisa' <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com <mailto:lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com> >
Cc: Johnson, Rick <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com <mailto:Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com> >; PBG Steering Committee (Public) <public-publishing-sc@w3.org <mailto:public-publishing-sc@w3.org> >
Subject: Re: Meeting times, structure, and alignment
 
I think we can best achieve the goal of having the broader publishing community in the discussion by having the discussions in the context of the BG, not the SC.
 
It makes sense to me for the actual chairs to coordinate--that is coordinate procedural, logistical type things--but to avoid having the substantive discussions there. The coordination would involve making sure something _gets discussed_ but the discussion should happen in the BG.
 
I think that would be much more in line with the W3C process.The SC is clearly an outlier--which some might see as an invasive species--in the W3C structure. It made sense during TPI time, but we're moving back to standard W3C structure now so we should be careful to align as well as we can with the W3C structure and process.
 
--Bill
 
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 12:04 PM McCloy-Kelley, Liisa < <mailto:lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com> lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com> wrote:
Rick-
 
One of the things that was discussed at TPAC (and is something the TAG does) was a rotating schedule of calls so that there are 3 timeblocks and it is at least decent for folks 2 out of 3 meetings. Luc and I talked about perhaps getting to something like that and less frequent and more organized calIs for the BG in the beginning of 2019. But in the meantime, there is a lot to do to figure out how we move forward and what the business needs, so keeping to at least bi-weekly for now made sense. 
 
To spell out what you are proposing and what it means for us (so that not everyone has to do the lookup I just did): 
1300GMT            London 1pm
                                Paris 2pm
                                New York  8am
                                San Francisco 5am
                                Tokyo 10pm
 
2100GMT             London 9pm
                                Paris 10pm
                                New York  4pm
                                San Francisco 1pm
                                Tokyo 6am (next day)
 
What do folks think?  
 
I think we haven’t really been using the Friday calls for agendas for the Tuesday calls for a long time. Sometimes we raise things there to talk about in advance, but we mostly have used those calls to keep things going with the EPUBcheck efforts over the last several months. Which has been quite successful thanks to the many efforts of mainly Tzviya, Rachel, Luc and George. Thank you to them.  
 
I am fine to change the purpose and name of that committee to something more related to coordination of the groups. I think we could do a better job of that generally. As I have mentioned in that call, it is hard to be a member of one of the groups and not all and still have a coherent picture of what is happening across. For us to give good value to membership at both the full and BG levels, we need to find a way to improve how we do that. 
 
Should it be the publishing-chairs group? We had specifically made the steering committee the chairs and the task force leaders, so maybe publishing-chairs-tf? I do think it is helpful to have both. 
 
Are we ready to let go of the idea of the steering committee? 
 
Personally, I still feel a responsibility to helping our broader publishing community feel like they can be a part of this work and have some say in the standards that guide what they are putting into the market without having to be engineers or having a ton of time to parse through rules and emails arguments about minutiae and semantics. I am hoping we can do that with the BG more as we move forward and with better coordination reporting back on the work and raising issues and questions at levels they can understand. 
 
Liisa
 
 
From: "Johnson, Rick" < <mailto:Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com> Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>
Date: Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 6:15 AM
To: W3C Publishing Steering Committee < <mailto:public-publishing-sc@w3.org> public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Meeting times, structure, and alignment
Resent-From: < <mailto:public-publishing-sc@w3.org> public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 6:15 AM
 
Three things I’d like to discuss within this group:
1.	Given the recent conversations about meeting times, and the recommendation about looking at the ISO best practice on teleconferencing (… there are only two windows where the timing of a two-hours conference is bearable: 13GMT and 21GMT. This can be characterized as “where is the night”, and the most frequent solution is “over the Pacific ocean” (which corresponds to 13GMT)), is it time to consider moving all of the publishing@w3c meetings (WG, BG, and CG) to these time slots?
2.	Given the current nature of the steering committee (coordination), I would like to suggest that we stop using the Friday calls (before the bi-weekly BG call) to plan the BG meeting with this group.  The co-chairs should arrange a call for that purpose, and we should use the Friday call exclusively for coordinating activities between the three groups (taking into account my third point below).
3.	In anticipation of a re-chartering activity for the WG, and a desire to remove any potential points of conflict that will only be distracting as we go out to the AC (and the already voiced concerns from some of the AC), the nature of this ‘steering committee’ should be aligned with W3C practices.  Essentially, I’m suggesting that we eliminate all references to a ‘steering committee’, officially disband it, and replace it with a coordination committee that represents the three groups (WG, BG, CG) and any other key areas.
 
 
-Rick
 


 
-- 
Bill Kasdorf
Principal, Kasdorf & Associates, LLC
Founding Partner,  <https://pubtechpartners.com/> Publishing Technology Partners
 <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com> kasdorf.bill@gmail.com
+1 734-904-6252
ISNI:  <http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786> http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786
ORCiD:  <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en> https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786
 

----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
 
Received on Sunday, 11 November 2018 16:47:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:53:30 UTC