Re: F2F Agenda

In the agenda we have discussion of rec track for EPUB accessibility before the rec track for EPUB 3.
Rec track of EPUB 3 is prerequisite for rec track of EPUB Accessibility. So, it is better to place it after discussion about rec track of EPUB 3.

With regards
Avneesh
From: Siegman, Tzviya 
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 23:40
To: Ivan Herman 
Cc: W3C Publishing Steering Committee 
Subject: RE: F2F Agenda

Hi Ivan,

 

I think that maybe we should rename the afternoon session “Roadmap”. You are right that we have no formal discussion for EPUB+Web. I do expect topics such as the desire to add addressability to come out of the survey, and this will be a natural progression to more web-related topics. One of the items already listed is what happens in 1 year/3 years/5 years. 

 

I added an item to the survey session:

What items are out of scope for EPUB but should still be standardized?

 

I think this also informs our roles and responsibilities session. We need to figure out who works on what. 

Thanks,

Tzviya

 

Tzviya Siegman

Information Standards Lead

Wiley

201-748-6884

tsiegman@wiley.com 

 

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> 
Sent: Sunday, February 2, 2020 6:19 AM
To: Siegman, Tzviya <tsiegman@wiley.com>
Cc: W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: F2F Agenda

 

Thanks Tzviya, 

 

overall, this looks really good to me. I have only one comment, but I am not sure where to put this…

 

The survey will cover data from the community on EPUB (and some related topic, but mostly EPUB), and there is no real question on what EPUB+Web would mean (I do not want to use the term WP, it has become  loaded term). I believe that would be part of the vision this committee could add to the work ahead, if we decide to continue the work on a WG. This is not part of the draft charter either.

 

Where would we discuss this? Probably under the 1:00-2:00 session, but I am not sure.

 

To add my pinch of salt on this: my vision would be that EPUB 3.x would replace the usage of PDF on the Web. This is not the vision we described in the document with Markus, it is way less ambitious, but is more realistic: make it so that EPUB3.2 could be played (albeit possibly in a separate tool, like we have pdf.js) in a browser and users could generate those EPUB-s as easily as they do PDF. Maybe this is only a matter of raising the awareness of EPUB beyond the closely knit publishing community because the technology makes it doable already; maybe there are technical hurdles to solve: I do not know. But I believe we would be in a better world if that vision was achieved.

 

(I obviously know that we cannot go public with such a statement this way and we'd have to find a better way to express this, because we don't want to a direct confrontation with Adobe. Ideally, I would like to have them on our side.)

 

Cheers,

 

Ivan

 

----

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

On 31 Jan 2020, 18:27 +0100, Siegman, Tzviya <tsiegman@wiley.com>, wrote:



  Hi All,

   

  Liisa and I have a proposed agenda for the 24 February F2F [1].

   

  We ask that the chairs for each group find time to meet in advance of the F2F to prepare for the Roles and Responsibilities session. Please come prepared to talk about the following questions for your WG/BG/CG:

    a.. What does your group do now? 
    b.. What works well in your group? 
    c.. What does not work in your group?
   

  [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/12mOkAVcopnEA_-H1t_TQ0ocUKzgqeA1u-zcArPdsTss/edit?usp=sharing

   

  Tzviya Siegman

  Information Standards Lead

  Wiley

  201-748-6884

  tsiegman@wiley.com