Re: RE: RE: RE: changes to sysinfo (was Fwd: Agenda - Distributed Meeting 2010-06-23)

Bryan,

Where in the charter or otherwise does it say that any aspect of service
quality which might impede or degrade web services is out of scope for any
discussion, let alone the definition of which connections are active or
preffered?

This is twice now that people have tried to tell me that something is out of
scope when there's no support for such an exclusion in the charter. That is
not ethical behavior and I hope the W3C will make that clear with
enforcement action.

We should also add (8) service charges to the aspects of service quality
which a web device user will reasonably be expected to want to know to
prefer which of the available connections are active. Are you going to try
to tell me that is out of scope too?

Sincerely,
James Salsman

On Jun 29, 2010 2:10 PM, "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (ATTCINW)" <BS3131@att.com>
wrote:

 James,




The intended scope of this discussion is much narrower I’m afraid than what
you intend with the list below. I am concerned only with the definition of
activeConnections as exposed through this API. As I said the determination
of a preferred connection (or recommended priority) based upon QoS measures
(leaving net neutrality and privacy out as a “quality” – especially since
they are well beyond the scope of this discussion) is not the intent of the
activeConnections attribute and should not factor into its determination.





Thanks,

Bryan Sullivan | AT&T



*From:* James Salsman [mailto:jsalsman@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Tuesday, June 29, 2010 2:02 PM


To: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (ATTCINW)
Cc: James Salsman; public-device-apis@w3.org; Tran, Dzung D
*Subject:* Re: RE: RE: changes to sysinfo (was Fwd: Agenda - Distributed
Meeting 2010-06-23)





Bryan,

It may be helpful to identify all aspects of service quality, because many
of them are ...