Re: EPUB and ISO

Hi all,
as anticipated we spoke with the Italian ISO persons (one of them had been already involved in the previous standardization of the EPUB as Technical specification) informing them about the idea of submitting the EPUB 3.0.1 and they asked us why we were not willing to submit the new version.

In any case, they asked us to participate as expert supporting the ISO Italian group who will be involved in the ISO process and to inform them when Korea will start the process.
So we will proceed with the step required to become expert and then wait when we decide which is the best solution we choose.

We will also be able trough them to participate to the definition of an EU Harmonized standard if the EU Commission will require it for the EU Accessibility Act.

Best
Cristina





Da: AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>
Data: mercoledì 16 maggio 2018 17:14
A: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
Cc: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>
Oggetto: Re: EPUB and ISO
Rinviato da: <public-publishingbg@w3.org>
Data rinvio: mercoledì 16 maggio 2018 17:13

Hi Leonard,

Thanks for feedback from Lisbon.

I confirm : EPUB 3.2 is the version to consider.

From Berlin, DPUB Summit
Luc

Le 16 mai 2018 à 16:59, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp<mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>> a écrit :
Leonard,

 I spoke with the secretariat of SC34 several  times about this topic. If Korea  submits 3.0.1 as fast tracked DISs, no rewriting is required.  The interpretation  of the secretariat matters in JTC1.  It is the only  authoritative interpretation.

2018年5月16日(水) 15:55 Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>>:
I am sitting in the JWG7 meeting in Lisbon discussing moving EPUB 3.0.1 forward as an ISO IS (international standard) as requested by this group (and others).  After reviewing tdirectives, we have all agreed that not only *MUST* the document go forward as an IS (fast -due to the current TS having expired!), but in order to do so it *MUST* be reformatted to ISO specs.

I know that this group felt strongly that if that was required, that perhaps the work should take place with 3.1 instead of 3.0.1.  is that still the case?  Can I speak to the committee on behalf of the BG (since I am a member of the BG)?

We  should  absolutely  completely  forget  3.1.  The  successor of 3.0 is 3.2, as agreed  in the  PBG.

Regards,
Makoto
Also, even if ISO were to move 3.0.1 forward, there are no resources available to do the necessary reformatting – which is also blocking things.

Leonard



________________________________

Network Confidentiality Notice

Il presente messaggio, e ogni eventuale documento a questo allegato, potrebbe contenere informazioni da considerarsi strettamente riservate ad esclusivo utilizzo del destinatario in indirizzo, il quale è l'unico autorizzato ad usarlo, copiarlo e, sotto la propria responsabilità, diffonderlo. Chiunque ricevesse questo messaggio per errore o comunque lo leggesse senza esserne legittimato è avvertito che trattenerlo, copiarlo, divulgarlo, distribuirlo a persone diverse dal destinatario è severamente proibito ed è pregato di darne notizia immediatamente al mittente oltre che cancellare il messaggio e i suoi eventuali allegati dal proprio sistema.
Le opinioni espresse nel messaggio sono quelle proprie del mittente, se non diversamente e specificatamente dichiarato dal mittente stesso.

This message, and any attached file transmitted with it, contains information that may be confidential or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient who only may use, copy and, under his responsibility, further disseminate it. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail or read it without entitlement be advised that keeping, copying, disseminating or distributing this message to persons other than the intended recipient is strictly forbidden. You are to notify immediately to the sender and to delete this message and any file attached from your system.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states otherwise.