Re: Increasing the gap between web and publishing or unifying them?

Tzviya,

Which of the two lists in my mail are you talking about?  The first
one is a submission by Vivliostyle.  It lists what is missing in CSS.
The second one is my personal attempt.  It lists what is missing
in the OWP.

Regards,
Makoto

2017-06-08 21:21 GMT+09:00 Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com>:

> We are in violent agreement that the groups within Publishing@W3C and the
> CSSWG must work together. I'm glad we solved that.
>
> Thank you, Makoto for putting together a list of items to get started. In
> the DPUB IG, Dave Cramer worked to prioritize the needs of Publishing for
> the CSS WG [1]. There were very few contributions from others. Might I
> suggest combining efforts and merging the list of requirements/needs into
> one location? I am thinking that it might be best to shift away from both
> GoogleDocs and a formal note. Maybe just make this a GitHub wiki page? When
> the Publishing WG is born, it can live there.
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-css-priorities/
>
> Tzviya Siegman
> Information Standards Lead
> Wiley
> 201-748-6884
> tsiegman@wiley.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Glazman [mailto:daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 3:32 AM
> To: public-publishingbg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Increasing the gap between web and publishing or unifying
> them?
>
> Le 08/06/2017 à 07:18, Florian Rivoal a écrit :
>
> > The CSS WG is not a "them" to which we should make requests and then
> > wait for solutions.
>
> Right. And it does not necessarily have the expertise, either on the tech
> side or the feature side. Think of CSS for circular displays proposed by
> LG: the proposals all came from LG, and then the WG commented on them for
> improvements.
> The CSS WG will consider (or not) everything other parties suggest, but
> you must be ready to be *there* to do the work with them.
>
> </Daniel>
>
>
>


-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto