W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > May 2011

[HOME_NETWORK_TF] About Service Migration (ISSUE-7) and Document Migration (ISSUE-15)

From: Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:57:20 +0200
To: "Jean-Claude Dufourd" <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
Cc: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.vvzs9u1u6ugkrk@rabdomant-ubuntu>
Hi JC,
during last call we touched on two of your usecases Service Migration  
(ISSUE-7) and Document Migration (ISSUE-15).
There were some comments from several participants that would require some  
actions from you.
I'll try to summarize the main issues here so you can act on them.

(I would like to ask everybody to point out in case I fail to list all the  
pointed out issues)

- for both usecases (and actually for all of them) would be better to use  
the word "application" rather then document (see also related discussion  
on the list)
Since I'm going to add a definition of application, basically similar to  
the html5 definition of document, you don't need to clarify in your  
usecase the term.

- for ISSUE-7 (and in general for any usecase you or anyone else will  
provide) would be better to provide a more detailed description of one  
particular scenario you have in mind with the steps that the user would  
have to do to cover that particular use case. So would be good if you  
could do for ISSUE-7 what you have done for ISSUE-15 (i.e. step by step  
description). You have actually called it "implementation" but I think  
that as far as you don't mention any specific technology (if not part of  
the use case of course) that can be safely part of the description itself.

Furthermore someone was concerned about the particular example you make  
since it was not clear how a moving service could still work when it is  
highly dependent from a platform capability. So if you could provide a  
more detailed, step by step, usecase that would be great.

- as also captured in the notes for ISSUE-15, the are 2 possible sub  
usecases that can be considered here, one that involve a web server and  
one that it does not (widget). Since it seems that what you are looking at  
is the second one (widget) is probably better to make this explicit.


Generic comment: we decided to split the requirement document into high  
level usecases and low level usecases. I think I have a pretty good  
understanding of the high level usecases (based on the discussion so far)  
so I will try to list them into the requirement document myself (then  
people can review it). Would be better then from now on if we focus on  
more specific and user centric usecase, like it could be your "voting"  
example since different services may imply very different requirements for  
a specification to cover.

/g




-- 
Giuseppe Pascale
TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software - Sweden
Received on Tuesday, 24 May 2011 16:00:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 24 May 2011 16:00:15 GMT