The explicit references to EPUB-WEB should be removed/reduced to make the text more applicable to non-EPUB work, too

Not ideal, but is still more understandable than the current name

(see also w3c/epubweb#42)

Less 'may', assertive statements. Or 'not "whether these challenges should be addressed" but "where to address these challenges"'

Also: "working with other groups" rather than just "a forum", "documenting, raising issues" vs. "discussions"

• A11y report
  ** milestone end of the year
• Requirements for pagination
  ** milestone 6 months
• Analysis, possibly prototype solution on Houdini approach
  ** milestone 15 months
• Requirement on packaging
  ** milestone end of the year
  ** possible work on packaging standard, analysis of the possible techinical solutions (though depends on cooperation with other WG)
  ** if a separate WG must be set up for this, milestone end of summer spring 2016
  ** otherwise end of 2016
• Structural semantics (note that milestone is related to PF)
  ** final document (with whichever solution we choose) milestone 12 months
• Identifiers requirements
  ** February
• Technical solution for identifiers
  ** possible document with the TAG spring 2016
  ** if a separate WG must be set up milestone for WG start end of summer 2016

The deliverables' section should make it clear that new documents may come up, eg, as outcome of the current STEM work, or work with IDPF on EPUB 3.1

The text should make it clear that work being started in the current IG carries over to the new IG (ARIA, A11y).

See also #3

Eg, add to mission (and scope section) something like "This IG is a continuation of the current DPUB IG and adds EPUB+WEB"

OLD:
Whilst this Interest Group is not chartered to specify Recommendations, it will provide technical directions, identify technical issues and outline prototype solutions that relevant Working Groups of the W3C will have to finalize as final Web standards.

PROPOSED:
While this Interest Group is not chartered to specify Recommendations, it will provide technical direction, identify technical issues, and outline prototype solutions for relevant Working Groups of the W3C to finalize as Web standards.

• the language and references are tied to EPUB which may give a wrong image, also v.a.v. IDPF.
  • shorten white paper quote?
  • keep EPUB-WEB or EPUB+WEB
• the list of open technical issues is fairly long although we do say that it is only a temporary list. It gives the impression of a huge task ahead. Maybe:
  • shorten the list to those that require the most technical work (layout & pagination, packaging, identification), and just hand wave for the rest?
• the list of deliverables and corresponding timeline should be filled (although, for an Interest Group, this requirement is not as stringent as for a Working Group!)
• the text should make it clear that work being started in the current IG carries over to the new IG (ARIA, A11y). On a more general level, it should emphasize that the group, in some sense, carries on the approach of the current IG in beeing the meeting point of all publication related issues, regardless of EPUB-WEB
• making it clearer how this group operates v.a.v. other WG-s and that it has the goal of proposing new ones (is this really clear in text)?

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-seantek-kerwin-arcmedia-type-01

Shorten list to pagination, packaging, and identification, refer to White Paper for the rest

Making also clear that those are an initial set of statements, that new issues may come

In the bullet items in scope making it more explicit that the IG may 'prototype' solutions, but spec wise and maybe implementation wise (eg, for pagination)

OLD:
The mission of the Digital Publishing Interest Group is to provide a forum for experts in the digital publishing ecosystem of electronic journals, magazines, news, or book publishing (authors, creators, publishers, news organizations, booksellers, accessibility and internationalization specialists, etc.) for technical discussions towards a future vision of Digital Publishing.

PROPOSED:
The mission of the Digital Publishing Interest Group is to provide a forum for experts in the digital publishing ecosystem of electronic journals, magazines, news, standards, or book publishing (authors, creators, publishers, news organizations, booksellers, accessibility and internationalization specialists, etc.) for technical discussions towards a future vision of Digital Publishing.

If the newer version of EPUB+WEB, including an architectural description based on Service Workers, becomes part of the official draft (see the corresponding pull request for details), the tasks may have to be changed a bit. Instead of 'packaging' something like 'architectural issues' or something similar should be used.