Re: [comment] Use cases and requirements for Media Fragments: Chapters 3, 4, 5

2009/4/8 Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>:
> Dear Silvia,
>
>> Will do what I can, but I'd rather promise the updates for after the
>> long weekend...
>
> Hum, we will talk about that tomorrow (today) on the call :-)
> The problem is that W3C can publish documents on Tuesday and Thursday only.
> If we miss this week opportunity, then it will be for next week which
> collides with the F2F.
>
>> a) framework within which we work to define media fragments
>> b) use case scenarios in which we can imagine media fragment use and
>> why some of them are out of scope (namely: because of the framework we
>> have set ourselves) - the scenarios are there to explain use cases and
>> to order them into different types, trying to make sure we have
>> covered all aspects
>> c) four dimensions of fragmentation that we consider as a consequence
>> of the use cases
>>
>> I think this flows more nicely. The "Requirements" are actually almost
>> a "Terminology" section which is why I think this section should go up
>> first.
>
> Then what you call 'requirements' is not what I call 'requirements' but
> indeed, it is more a terminology issue. I would then also agree with your
> suggestion with the following changes:
>  - Put the current section 4 into the section 2 - "Terminology"

I thought about that, too, but they are not "terminology" if you look
at them. I'd rather move it just after the terminology section and
call it something that describes what it is. I used to call them "side
conditions" as in specifying a framework within which we define the
technology. But  there must be a better word than that!

>  - Let the current section 3 as it is, this is our scenarios
>  - The current section 5 becomes section 4 and is renamed as 'Requirements',
> this is our 4 dimensions we can name as "req-x" and be referred back in each
> scenario.

OK, will do.

Cheers,
Silvia.

Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2009 05:41:03 UTC