Re: Thoughts on rechartering and the future of publications on the web

On 11/19/2018 9:39 AM, Laurent Le Meur wrote:
>
>> I would like to see EPUB stay where it is – in the CG.  ....
>> The same is true for Audiobooks – it should also take place in a CG 
>> where it can grow and prosper.
>
> I must disagree for audiobooks, at least partially. There are two 
> aspects on audiobook distribution to the end-user: offline (using 
> OCF-lite) and online: in the online case audiobooks are a specific 
> case of Web Publications. The WG must work on it, and may better do it 
> sooner than later.
>
> If the W3C does not accept offline use cases as decent use cases 
> because useful for the publishing industry, we can develop OCF-lite 
> outside of the W3C (or as a CG), with another body to host the 
> specification (see OPDS or Readium LCP).

I would think that W3C could accept offline use cases.  What is the 
problem with them?


>
> But it would be an issue still, because the IPDF was in charge of a 
> format useful for both B2B interchange and end-user distribution. The 
> merge of IDPF with the W3C was made with a promise that the IDPF scope 
> would be extended, not that the whole B2B part would be orphan 
> standard-wise.
>
> Laurent
>
>>
>> From: AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr 
>> <mailto:LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>>
>> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 5:26 AM
>> To: W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org 
>> <mailto:public-publishingbg@w3.org>>
>> Subject: Re: Thoughts on rechartering and the future of publications 
>> on the web
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Times seem to be at expressing opinions: here is mine.
>>
>> I’d like to remind us all that ‘P’ in PWG/PBG stands for Publication 
>> and that we are in the PUBLISHING@W3C context.
>> This is a vertical where we have to address an industry needs.
>>
>> 1.      Web Publication
>>
>> Yes we have to build on existing Web technologies and contribute to 
>> make them evolve, but it is because we have to understand with the 
>> Web community what a Publication is, how it differs from a web site, 
>> how it comes to life at a precise moment in time with a specific set 
>> of metadata, lives in distribution channels, and makes money with 
>> several business models.
>>
>> This perspective, IMHO should make us more pragmatic than 
>> theoretical, more use case than pure technology dependent.
>>
>> From some of us, I hear that the progress we are making in the PWG 
>> has a smell of EPUB, but for others like me, it addresses a need than 
>> comes from the existing processes of the whole digital publishing 
>> supply chain, from authoring to distributing to user content consuming.
>>
>> The latter is what the publishing industry needs for a future 
>> publishing standard.
>>
>> Even more, pragmatic urgent needs around audiobooks have been 
>> identified. Then, as PUBLISHING@W3C, why not put all our energy to 
>> address them!
>> Well, the good news is: PWG Audio TF is already on track for that.
>>
>>
>> 2.      EPUB 3.2
>>
>> On the same plane, I don’t see EPUB3.2 REC track being pragmatic nor 
>> in phase with the urgent needs of today’s pub industry.
>>
>> EPUB3 is an already existing standard, it is widely used 
>> internationally, it is built on existing pieces of technology 
>> that are themselves international standards, widely adopted by the 
>> whole digital document eco-system:
>> ·       ZIP (ISO/IEC 21320-1) is inside MS Office, OpenOffice, etc…
>> ·       XML (W3C standard) is used to encode the structure (OPF) and 
>> the documents (xHTML)
>> ·       And more.
>> Ok not all of this is pure Web but it doesn’t matter for EPUB : it 
>> does the job !
>>
>> What the pub industry needs today with EPUB is a stable and clear 
>> eco-system to reinforce the adoption and usage of EPUB3.
>> With the umbrella of W3C, we are at this very moment in progress to 
>> achieve that goal with EPUB3.2 CG Report and epubcheck revision with 
>> a EPUB3.2 validation in Q2 2019.
>>
>> This momentum is a unique chance to make trad publishers stop 
>> producing EPUB2 and come  to a much better technological, accessible, 
>> user friendly environment.
>>
>> In this global view, you will not be surprised that I believe making 
>> EPUB3.2 a REC is not a good idea. It will not only take energy and 
>> time from the WG, it will also put EPUB3 out of reach of the pub 
>> industry!
>> We all know that W3C full members fees are unaffordable for almost 
>> all publishing houses around the world, and not only the fees, but 
>> also the time consuming, expertise, and travel expenses.
>> Then as a REC, EPUB will not be maintained any more by publishers !
>>
>> So I come back to the beginning: as PUBLISHING@W3C is a vertical for 
>> the publishing industry, please leave EPUB3 with its old fashion set 
>> of standards inside the Community Group who did in 6 month an 
>> extraordinary useful job to settle the spec back in compatibility order.
>>
>> And the good news is:  EPUB3 CG is moving on to a better spec for the 
>> need of epubcheck revision.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Luc Audrain
>