Re: [apis] Gap analysis and NSD

One more comment: I'm adding some "?" cells. With that I mean basically two
things

- the spec could be applicable, more investigation is needed
- the spec could be applicable and clarification on the req. is needed to
confirm this


On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>wrote:

> for the record: I'll not be able to attend todays call but I'm putting
> some comments and an additional column in the document. I would appreciate
> if you can look at them (if any of them is not clear, you can skip it, but
> some are easy to address)
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>wrote:
>
>> good work, I would encourage others to provide their input on that table.
>>
>> @Daniel
>> I've added some colors to your cells to make it easier to see the
>> covered/not covered/undefined
>>
>> @TF moderators
>> is this table linked from the wiki? if not, would you mind adding a link
>> to it  somewhere?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Daniel Davis <ddavis@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for this, Giuseppe.
>>>
>>> I've indicated what I think the NSD API covers in our spreadsheet:
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdEctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=1
>>>
>>> ✓ = covered
>>> ⨯ = not covered, could be added
>>> (blank) = not applicable
>>>
>>> I've also added columns for what I think are relevant specs for the
>>> whole gap analysis. We can change or delete them as necessary.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On 05/10/13 17:20, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> > as discussed during last Media APIs TF call, we are now moving on to
>>> the
>>> > next (final) phase of our work for the current iteration: the gap
>>> analysis.
>>> >
>>> > In this phase, we need to analyse existing specs and see if there are
>>> > technologies that already satisfy the requirements we have listed in
>>> [1]
>>> > (extracted from the use cases in [2])
>>> >
>>> > So there is an action point on each TF member to come up with
>>> suggestion
>>> > of which specs can be used to address our requirements or which specs
>>> > would need to be "extended" in order to meet our requirements. Please
>>> > send an email to this list including:
>>> >
>>> > 1. requirement
>>> > 2. related spec
>>> > 3. identified gaps (if any)
>>> >
>>> > Since we have already mentioned the NSD spec [3] few times, I would
>>> like
>>> > to ask people to start reviewing it (as also requested by the DAP
>>> group)
>>> > and provide feedback on if such spec address the identified
>>> requirements
>>> > on service/device discovery, and if not, why. (I'll provide my comments
>>> > on this in a separate mail)
>>> >
>>> > /g
>>> >
>>> > P.S. During the call we decided to try to get feedback on a voluntary
>>> > base, but if nobody volunteers we may need to fall back on assigning
>>> > each requirement to one TF member during next call ;)
>>> >
>>> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Requirements
>>> > [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases
>>> > [3]
>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/discovery-api/Overview.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>