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

> On 8 Jun 2017, at 16:01, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com <mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>> wrote:
> 
> Certainly the what’s missing from the OWP document.
> 
> I think it would be extremely helpful for the Publishing WG to at least be aware of what Vivliostyle things needs to happen in CSS. I would think that the CSSWG would value a submission from a WG over a submission from just one member, but I don’t know. I would think this is exactly the sort of coordination that Daniel and Florian are seeking. It would be helpful to coordinate the efforts of JLReq and LatinReq, especially if there are specific mentions of EPUB.

I am not sure whether the right 'source' for such requirement is the BG or the WG. I am tempted to think the former; the WG must concentrate on the specific technologies for the (P)WP.

The important point is that any such submission should clearly be marked as representing a large portion of the publishing industry to back it up. That is more the role of the BG I believe.

(Of course, the WG must be aware of these things, but that is a different issue.)

Ivan

> 
> Tzviya
> 
> Tzviya Siegman
> Information Standards Lead
> Wiley
> 201-748-6884
> tsiegman@wiley.com <mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>
> 
> From: eb2mmrt@gmail.com <mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com> [mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com <mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com>] On Behalf Of MURATA Makoto
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 8:54 AM
> To: public-publishingbg@w3.org <mailto:public-publishingbg@w3.org>
> Subject: 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 <mailto: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/ <https://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-css-priorities/>
> 
> Tzviya Siegman
> Information Standards Lead
> Wiley
> 201-748-6884 <tel:201-748-6884>
> tsiegman@wiley.com <mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Glazman [mailto:daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com <mailto:daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>]
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 3:32 AM
> To: public-publishingbg@w3.org <mailto: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


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>