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

Re: Meeting times, structure, and alignment

From: Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 13:00:20 -0500
Message-ID: <CALhciFiUuoBymT8sBrL8hnGoc-UOr8YDsxg2_tjROPoWcM=fsQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, "Liisa'" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, "Johnson, Rick" <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>, "PBG Steering Committee (Public)" <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
+1 to George's proposal

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:47 AM George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>
wrote:

> 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> wrote:
>
>
>
> +1 to Bill’s comment.
>
>
>
> Best
>
> George
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 9, 2018 10:33 AM
> *To:* Liisa' <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>
> *Cc:* Johnson, Rick <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>; PBG Steering
> Committee (Public) <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 <
> 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" <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 6:15 AM
> *To: *W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
> *Subject: *Meeting times, structure, and alignment
> *Resent-From: *<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, Publishing Technology Partners
> <https://pubtechpartners.com/>*
>
> kasdorf.bill@gmail.com
>
> +1 734-904-6252
>
> ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786
> ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786
> <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en>
>
>
>
>
> ----
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
*Bill Kasdorf*
*Principal, Kasdorf & Associates, LLC*

*Founding Partner, Publishing Technology Partners
<https://pubtechpartners.com/>*
kasdorf.bill@gmail.com
+1 734-904-6252

ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786
<https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en>
Received on Sunday, 11 November 2018 18:01:23 UTC

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