Re: Reviewing our issues

Just a reminder that we want to use for audiobooks etc as well. "Narration"
will feel really strange to people (I don't think it's only a me thing).

And if we can not use the word "Media" anymore within specs such as this,
then we really have a problem 😉

On Thu, 14 Nov 2019, 13:09 Laurent Le Meur, <laurent.lemeur@edrlab.org>
wrote:

> +1 for Sync Narration.
> -1 for the addition of for Publications.
>
> With Sync *Narration* we use a term which source is clearly the
> publishing culture. Plus, *narration* is one of the main properties in
> the JSON document representing the alternate rendition of the source
> content.
> The issue with Sync *Media* is its proximity (in the W3C) with terms like
> *Media* Queries and *Media* & Entertainment Activity.
>
> Laurent
>
>
> Le 12 nov. 2019 à 22:14, Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> Ok, let’s try this again - issue #24 is about naming. We should pick a
> name because audiobooks is likely going to CR, and our note is referenced
> by that spec. I do understand that as a CG note, we can rename our document
> with little consequence, but as we will be referenced informatively by a
> rec track document, it would be really nice to choose now and stick with it.
>
> Based on this issue:
> https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/24
>
> I see these options:
>
> Synchronized Media
> Synchronized Narration
> Synchronized Alternative Media
>
> Any of them could be appended with “for Publications”.
>
> Let’s vote. Please indicate:
>
> 1. Which of the three choices you like the most.
> 2. Whether you prefer to append with “for Publications” or not
>
> We don’t need new ideas or other variations at this point. We’re a small
> group, so your one vote could change everything!! Voting closes by the end
> of this week (Nov 15 end of day in California).
>
> Thanks
> Marisa
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 11, 2019, at 15:07, Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Yep, that was the idea! And I see that it worked - thanks for chiming in.
>
> And now for something completely different — I won’t call it baseurl but …
> https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/26
>
> Marisa
>
>
>
> On Oct 11, 2019, at 01:30, Romain <rdeltour@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Stirring up participation with a bikeshedding naming issue, I see what you
> did there… well played (grin).
>
> More seriously, +1 to using GitHub directly. Possibly with an email
> reminder from time to time for pressing issues which lack any comments.
>
> Best,
> Romain.
>
>
>
> On 10 Oct 2019, at 23:03, Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I plan to work in the coming days and weeks on resolving the remaining
> issues in our tracker, and cleaning up the draft reports.
>
> I’d also like to engage the CG more as I do this work. Does it work best
> to discuss the issues on this list, or would it be preferable to use the
> github tracker directly?
>
> Here’s the first issue. It’s a relatively easy one, I think:
> https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/24
>
> Thanks
> Marisa
>
>
>
>
>
>