- From: Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 12:30:06 -0400
- To: "Johnson, Rick" <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com>
- Cc: AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com>, George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <181324FA-E9A0-4726-9D47-C968E3CBD3BE@gmail.com>
+1 Sent from my iPhone On Sep 4, 2018, at 12:18 AM, Johnson, Rick <Rick.Johnson@vitalsource.com> wrote: My understanding of where we left the sc when we discussed this last spring was that it would be the chairs of the WG, BG, and CG, and the leads on any task force that were created, with the purpose being coordination of efforts, and strategic direction(s). The name SC may no longer be appropriate, and I agree that while we need the coordination, it should be within the bounds of the W3C process. If nothing like that exists, we should propose amending it. Rick Johnson | Vice President, Product Strategy VitalSource Technologies, LLC get.vitalsource.com From: AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr> Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 at 8:48 PM To: Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> Cc: George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org> Subject: [External] Re: question about the SC Resent-From: <public-publishing-sc@w3.org> Resent-Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 at 8:48 PM In any case we would need a coordination between the 3 groups. IMO this has been proved useful during the last year. This what was setup with Bill McCoy: the SC being a coordination of chairs if the 3 groups of Publishing@W3C plus W3C staff. If the problem is in the name SC, can we change it? But there may still be a question of governance of the whole Publishing@W3C. How will this be organised? Luc > Le 30 août 2018 à 18:17, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Based on the experience of the last two years, I think that the full > Publishing Business Group could function just fine without the > steering committee. I think it would even be advantageous. I'd be wary > of joining the business group today if I knew that all the decisions > happened in a separate committee, with no clear indication of how to > join/be elected/be appointed. > > And I share Makoto's concerns that we are drifting quite far from W3C > process. So I would propose that we disband the SC. > > Dave >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 12:35 PM George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com> wrote: >> >> Dear SC, >> >> >> >> I have this question from Makoto: >> >> I thought that the SC will be automatically disbanded. What >> >> was the agreement between IDPF and W3C? Does it assure >> >> eternal term of the SC and its members? >> >> >> >> I am wondering how can the SC justify control over the >> >> PBG/PWG when it is not even mentioned by the W3C >> >> process document. Daniel Glazman left Publishing@W3C >> >> for this reason. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Makoto >> >> >> >> Best >> >> George >> >> >> >> George Kerscher Ph.D. >> >> -In our Information Age, access to information is a fundamental human right. >> >> Chief Innovations Officer, DAISY Consortium >> >> http://www.daisy.org >> >> Senior Advisor, Global Literacy, Benetech >> >> http://www.benetech.org >> >> President, International Digital Publishing Forum (IDPF) >> >> http://www.idpf.org >> >> Member of the National Museum and Library Services Board (IMLS) >> >> http://www.imls.gov >> >> Chair Steering Council Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), a division of the W3C >> >> http://www.w3c.org/wai >> >> Phone: +1 406/549-4687 >> >> Cell:+1 406/544-2466 >> >> Email: kerscher@montana.com >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2018 16:31:35 UTC