search

w3c / epub-3-wg-charter

Charter for a proposed W3C EPUB 3 Working Group
https://w3c.github.io/epub-3-wg-charter/
Other
10 stars 4 forks source link

add new success criteria #25

Closed dauwhe closed 4 years ago

dauwhe commented 4 years ago

What does success for the working group mean?

  1. There are multiple, independent, interoperable implementations of EPUB 3.X that are widely used.
  2. Existing content is supported. All conforming EPUB 3.2 publications should remain conformant to EPUB 3.X.
  3. Changes to the global ecosystem (including authors, publishers, distributors, retailers, reading systems, and tool makers) are minimized, and made only after careful consideration of how they would affect all constituencies.
  4. Validation tools such as EPUBCheck fully support EPUB 3.X.

What else? How can we more clearly describe our goals?

iherman commented 4 years ago

To help preview the new version:

https://raw.githack.com/dauwhe/epub-3-wg-charter/dauwhe-scope/index.html

mattgarrish commented 4 years ago

Should there be some mention of solving real-world publishing issues, or is that getting too aspirational?

"Improvements to the standard solve immediate and quantifiable issues faced in the EPUB ecosystem."

The focus seems to be on not changing anything too drastically.

iherman commented 4 years ago

"Improvements to the standard solve immediate and quantifiable issues faced in the EPUB ecosystem."

Where would you put this?

(I am a bit concerned about the charter becoming too long and repetitive...)

mattgarrish commented 4 years ago

Where would you put this?

In this bullet list.

It's a qualification that we want to focus on real needs, not go off on fishing trips to add things of nebulous future value. That's how we've ended up with now-deprecated features.

iherman commented 4 years ago

I am fine merging this, though I am afraid we still have to do what I referred to in https://github.com/w3c/epub-3-wg-charter/pull/25#discussion_r413514645. But that can be a separate item in the same section. (And then we may face other members who will ask to shorten the charter because it is repetitive...)

iherman commented 4 years ago

Admin: I would think merging this PR would be a good idea; we can still come back to that later. It is not a good idea to leave such a PR in limbo for a long time, it has relevance to open issues, like #8 and #23...

@murata2makoto @dshiohama any comment before we do that?