W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-automotive@w3.org > October 2015

Requirements from Seattle use cases

From: Junichi Hashimoto <xju-hashimoto@kddi.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 03:19:13 +0900
To: Paul Boyes <pb@opencar.com>, public-automotive <public-automotive@w3.org>, "public-autowebplatform@w3.org" <public-autowebplatform@w3.org>, "public-auto-privacy-security@w3.org" <public-auto-privacy-security@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5616B3A1.5030508@kddi.com>
Hi,

I've updated the worksheet.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14ij-2I-H4HbilVQ_muCmUayVqmVfdbkoke690MA0kdo/edit#gid=1828778399

In the Requirements sheet of the above document, 32 requirements are 
listed. I derived these requirements from factors of the use cases that 
we listed up in the Seattle F2F.

Related use case is referred by its number. For example, a requirement 
"Users should be possible to restrict API depending on application" is 
from use case number 27 and 44.

The purpose of this matrix is to make clear which item should be covered 
by the spec and how to treat other items. It requires consideration from 
several aspects such as feasibility, responsible module, vehicle topic 
or not, etc. My thought is described in column I.
I'd like to ask members to review the column as well.

 From my perspective, there are at least two items which we should 
consider deeper. They is user ID and Log(history). I'll post another 
mail about them.

Regards,
Junichi
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2015 18:29:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 24 October 2017 18:52:44 UTC