Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - what is the right scope for functionality that should be supported in the first iteration of the joint measurement effort? (#56)

> Thanks for filing this @marianapr. I am generally OK with scoping to an as-simple-as-possible MVP, but I would prefer we pick an overall architecture which allows for the flexibility we think we need to support future use-cases (e.g. ML training, etc.).

By "overall architecture" do you mean API? Or do you mean something like server architecture?

Regardless, it seems to me that we've heard two substantive questions:

1. Should we expand the scope to include optimization?
2. Should we contract the scope to not include cross-device conversions?

I try to come at both of these from the perspective of what we know how to do. I.e., we should target as MVP something we most know how build. Based on the discussion last time, I think that rules out optimization, which seems like an open problem in a pretty substantial way. If there are things we know will rule it out that don't otherwise make things better, let's not do those, but otherwise I think we should defer it.

WRT cross-device conversion, my sense is that it's somewhere between a nice to have and a very important depending on who you talk to. This brings us to whether it significantly complicates things to implement it. To which the answer is.... maybe?




-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by ekr
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/meetings/issues/56#issuecomment-1145409930 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Thursday, 2 June 2022 22:38:14 UTC