Re: Reviewing our issues

I have made sure the upcoming Audiobooks spec refers to “Synchronized Narration” correctly.

There was another issue of MIME type [1], which makes an appearance in the Audiobooks examples for sync narration usage. I’ve made a preliminary decision (“application/vnd.syncnarr+json”), explained in the issue comments [2]. 

Marisa

1. https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/10 <https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/10>
2. https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/10#issuecomment-559190686 <https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/10#issuecomment-559190686>


> On Nov 25, 2019, at 13:19, Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks to everyone who shared their thoughts - the results are:
> 
> 1. Synchronized Narration: 6 votes
> 2. Synchronized Media: 3 votes
> 3. Synchronized Accessible Media: 1 vote (from me)
> 
> 1. Include “for Publications”: 1 (or maybe 2) votes
> 2. Don’t include “for Publications”: 5 votes
> 
> So (drum roll) - our report will be called “Synchronized Narration” 🎉 Which pretty much matches the language currently in use (I was testing it out), so that’s nice. 
> 
> Thanks again for your participation.
> 
> Marisa
> 
>> On Nov 25, 2019, at 13:12, Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com <mailto:marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> One more vote for “Synchronized Narration” - 
>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> From: "Rasmussen, Lloyd" <lras@loc.gov <mailto:lras@loc.gov>>
>>> Subject: RE: Reviewing our issues
>>> Date: November 15, 2019 at 13:31:37 PST
>>> To: Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com <mailto:marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>>
>>> 
>>> I vote for “Synchronized Narration.”
>>>  
>>> Lloyd Rasmussen, Senior Staff Engineer
>>> National Library Service for the Blind and Print Disabled
>>> Library of Congress, Washington, DC 20542
>>> 202-707-0535     https://nls.loc.gov <https://nls.loc.gov/>
>>> The preceding opinions are my own and not necessarily those of the Library of Congress, NLS.
>>>  
>>> From: Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com <mailto:marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>> 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 4:14 PM
>>> To: W3C Synchronized Multimedia for Publications CG <public-sync-media-pub@w3.org <mailto:public-sync-media-pub@w3.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: Reviewing our issues
>>>  
>>> 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 <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 <mailto: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 <https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/26>
>>>  
>>> Marisa
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Oct 11, 2019, at 01:30, Romain <rdeltour@gmail.com <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <https://github.com/w3c/sync-media-pub/issues/24>
>>>  
>>> Thanks
>>> Marisa
>> 
>