W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-publishingbg@w3.org > April 2017

Re: Comment on "Call for Review: Publishing Working Group Charter"

From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 07:06:09 +0200
To: public-publishingbg@w3.org
Message-ID: <f0a80011-63f9-0b4f-0ca1-e629a31c7692@disruptive-innovations.com>
Le 19/04/2017 à 00:05, Garth Conboy a écrit :

> Looking at a couple of the comments on the charter, I wanted to provide
> one potential clarification...
> 
> We have PWP and Web Publications as both incoming and outgoing in the
> charter (as an input document and as deliverables).  The "pwp" URL-ed
> document really about Web Publications specified as an input document is
> "https://www.w3.org/TR/pwp/".
> 
> This document is rumination by the Digital Publishing Interest Group
> regarding what a Web Publication could be and explorations of numerous
> other related topics.
> 
> This document is NOT, in any way, an initial draft of a Rec or Note or
> other output document that would be produced by the Publishing Working
> Group -- it is not "spec-ish" -- it's just an indication that the IG has
> been incubating on this topic for several years.

Garth, thanks for your message but I am sorry to say I don't understand
it at all.

WP and PWP and listed as Deliverables of the Publishing WG by Section
3.1 of the Charter and have ETAs on the REC track in section 3.3. They
are also, as you say yourself above, Input documents coming from the
DPUB IG.

In any case, WP and PWP *are* « an initial draft of a Rec or Note or
other output document that would be produced by the Publishing Working
Group » exactly *because* of Section 3.1. According to your message,
they should not be listed there at all. This is deeply confusing.

Are you saying that WP/PWP *as they exist now in the DPUB IG*,
and WP/PWP in the Publishing WG's Charter are totally different beasts?
They don't appear different *at all*, reading the prose in 3.1.

If yes, it's so completely unclear in the Charter this alone deserves
to send the Charter back for (deep) clarification. If no, then I am
totally lost by your message above, sorry...

</Daniel>
Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2017 05:06:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 19 April 2017 05:06:41 UTC