- From: Alexandra K. Mikityuk <alex@sec.t-labs.tu-berlin.de>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:27:15 +0100
- To: "Meerveld, Colin" <C.Meerveld@activevideo.com>
- Cc: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <8ba7352c-75ef-2e98-704b-3f09d3d6ba91@sec.t-labs.tu-berlin.de>
Dear Colin, dear all, @Mark: thank you for your comments, first! @Colin: alright I do agree. Lets's keep the things separated and create a separate group note, if needed. I have also finalised my tasks [1] as discussed during the call: - easyClient to Cloud Browser Client - terminology section added - description of the approaches added I have also added the User Input and the Cloud Browser Server on the diagrams. >From my point of view, we could make a final review and start the process of publishing of the document. Best, Alexandra. [1] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_TF/groupnote Am 24.01.17 um 15:22 schrieb Meerveld, Colin: > Hi Alexandra, > > Personally i would like to have an group note which describes the > cloud browser architecture. We could say something about a split > browser but this assumes that the reader is familiar with this > concept. I believe it well make more sense to explain a cloud browser > which is understandable on his own. Perhaps we could create a > dedicated group note which explains the differences as they are very > related? > > Thanks, > > Colin > > > > > >> On 24 Jan 2017, at 11:56, Alexandra K. Mikityuk >> <alex@sec.t-labs.tu-berlin.de <mailto:alex@sec.t-labs.tu-berlin.de>> >> wrote: >> >> Dear Colin, >> >> great!, thank you for sharing. >> >> I think its important to mention the main differencies in the group >> note also. As we discussed during the call it could be a summarized >> statement from the CBTF how do we see these differences (DOM >> mentioned by Mark, etc.). However, personally I do not think that we >> have to do it in such a detailed way. At the end of the day, we do >> not want to explain the SplitBrowser, but the CB concept. So it would >> be helpfull to put only the information that helps to understand the CB. >> >> The extended comparison could become a part of the long architecture >> document that might be published together with UCs/Reqs at the end of >> the TF lifetime. >> >> Best, >> Alexandra. >> >> Am 20.01.17 um 15:10 schrieb Meerveld, Colin: >>> As discussed during the meeting i added an article [1] which >>> explains the differences between a cloud browser and a so-called >>> split browser. I am not sure if we need to put it in the group note >>> as-well. >>> >>> Any comments and suggestion will be appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Colin >>> >>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_TF/cloud_browser_vs_split_browser >>> >>>> On 11 Jan 2017, at 16:54, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org >>>> <mailto:ashimura@w3.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> available at: >>>> https://www.w3.org/2017/01/11-webtv-minutes.html >>>> >>>> also as text below. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Kazuyuki >>>> >>>> --- >>>> [1]W3C >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/ >>>> >>>> - DRAFT - >>>> >>>> Web&TV IG - Cloud Browser TF >>>> >>>> 11 Jan 2017 >>>> >>>> See also: [2]IRC log >>>> >>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2017/01/11-webtv-irc >>>> <http://www.w3.org/2017/01/11-webtv-irc> >>>> >>>> Attendees >>>> >>>> Present >>>> Alexandra, Colin, Kaz >>>> >>>> Regrets >>>> Chair >>>> Alexandra >>>> >>>> Scribe >>>> kaz >>>> >>>> Contents >>>> >>>> * [3]Topics >>>> 1. [4]Welcome2017 >>>> 2. [5]Short update of 2016 >>>> 3. [6]Current task - Architecture Group Note >>>> * [7]Summary of Action Items >>>> * [8]Summary of Resolutions >>>> __________________________________________________________ >>>> >>>> Welcome2017 >>>> >>>> alexandra: happy to find this new slot >>>> ... would like to ask people actively participated in the TF if >>>> they can participate this year as well >>>> ... the Cloud Browser TF has been extended until 30 April 2017 >>>> ... and possibly can be extended until TPAC after the IG's >>>> extension >>>> >>>> Short update of 2016 >>>> >>>> alexandra: Colin has generated draft spec >>>> ... want to propose work on the draft and use cases in parallel >>>> ... talk about the draft first and then use cases next >>>> ... which work to be published as a group note? >>>> ... would propose Colin talk about the draft note >>>> >>>> Current task - Architecture Group Note >>>> >>>> colin: draft on the wiki page >>>> ... highlights the basic concept of Cloud Browsers >>>> >>>> -> >>>> [9]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_T >>>> F/groupnote draft for the group note >>>> >>>> [9] >>>> https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_TF/groupnote >>>> >>>> alexandra: updated the diagram >>>> ... question on how to call the client >>>> ... Cloud Browser's client >>>> ... just put "EasyClient" as the term now >>>> ... if OK by you, would like to go with that >>>> >>>> kaz: maybe we should have a terminology section at the top of >>>> the document >>>> >>>> alexandra: tx >>>> ... the second one is description of components >>>> >>>> <alexandra> 1. easyclient >>>> >>>> <alexandra> 2. component description >>>> >>>> <alexandra> 3. split browser? >>>> >>>> <alexandra> 4. approach description >>>> >>>> alexandra: component description is kind of terminology section >>>> ... and then provide a couple of sentences for split browser >>>> >>>> colin: it is actually far from "easy" :) >>>> ... the name should imply what it does >>>> ... "client" has some specific meaning and Cloud Browser's >>>> client is a bit different from usual clients >>>> >>>> alexandra: can we stuck with "Cloud Browser Client"? >>>> >>>> kaz: we can start with that friendly term :) >>>> >>>> alexandra: and we can use "Cloud Browser Client" in our >>>> description >>>> >>>> colin: yes >>>> >>>> alexandra: ok >>>> ... next "component description" >>>> >>>> colin: is that a terminology section? >>>> >>>> alexandra: depends on how we start the document >>>> >>>> -> [10]https://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/ home network requirements >>>> note >>>> >>>> [10] https://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/ <https://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/> >>>> >>>> kaz: we can use that note as a template >>>> >>>> alexandra: every term is defined at the beginning >>>> >>>> kaz: actually, we can start with actual requirements and pick >>>> up difficult terms and add them to the terminology section >>>> later >>>> >>>> colin: brief description of terms >>>> >>>> alexandra: we don't really have requirements at the moment >>>> >>>> kaz: we can simply describe our architecture instead >>>> >>>> <alexandra> ... intro, terminology, architecture section (with >>>> subsection 1-7 in current version) >>>> >>>> kaz: that could be an initial structure >>>> >>>> alexandra: ok >>>> ... can start the terminology section >>>> ... should we include some text about what we do and what we >>>> don't do >>>> >>>> colin: in the client section, I tried to explain the difference >>>> ... like split browser >>>> ... could help people understand the difference >>>> >>>> alexandra: would propose we have a separate section to explain >>>> the difference from usual browser >>>> >>>> colin: will do that >>>> >>>> kaz: if it's easier for you to directly use HTML, you can start >>>> to use GitHub >>>> >>>> colin: no problem with wiki or GitHub >>>> >>>> alexandra: will restructure the draft based on the discussion >>>> ... and start terminology section >>>> ... let's start to review in 2 weeks >>>> ... and then put the draft on the group's review >>>> >>>> colin: sounds like a good plan >>>> ... good to get more people >>>> >>>> kaz: quick question >>>> ... will on work on the use cases in parallel? >>>> >>>> alexandra: no, we'll concentrate on the architecture group note >>>> ... and then will work on the use cases >>>> >>>> kaz: ok, tx for your clarification >>>> >>>> [ adjourned ] >>>> >>>> Summary of Action Items >>>> >>>> Summary of Resolutions >>>> >>>> [End of minutes] >>>> __________________________________________________________ >>>> >>>> >>>> Minutes formatted by David Booth's [11]scribe.perl version >>>> 1.148 ([12]CVS log) >>>> $Date: 2017/01/11 15:52:35 $ >>>> >>>> [11] >>>> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm >>>> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> >>>> [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/ >>>> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Auto, WoT, TV, MMI and Geo >>>> Tel: +81 3 3516 2504 >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Alexandra K. Mikityuk >> Security in Telecommunications / New Media >> TU-Berlin / Telekom Innovation Laboratories >> Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, D-10587 Berlin >> Mobile: +49 171 5669475 > -- Alexandra K. Mikityuk Security in Telecommunications / New Media TU-Berlin / Telekom Innovation Laboratories Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, D-10587 Berlin Mobile: +49 171 5669475
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2017 20:28:17 UTC