W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rqtf@w3.org > July 2019

RE: Mapping of draft WebRTC user requirements and RFC 5194 ToIP/RTT

From: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:40:45 +0000
To: Joshue O Connor <joconnor@w3.org>
CC: RQTF <public-rqtf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BN7PR07MB484901A5B078370C29D04FE4ABF90@BN7PR07MB4849.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Thank you, Josh, for the draft.

As a general suggestion, based on recent RQTF meetings, you could consider reworking the introductory material to clarify that these are general real-time communication use cases - not specific to issues affecting the WebRTC specification. You could then separate out the issues that affect WebRTC or other W3C work.

Also, did you search RFC5194 for requirements that aren't covered by any of the existing use cases? For example, the ability to switch between voice/video/real-time text at any point in a conversation, or to invite a relay service into the conversation at any time, seem significant to me and could perhaps be better brought to the fore.

This document is a solid draft that continues to evolve in the right direction.

-----Original Message-----
From: Joshue O Connor <joconnor@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 7:40 AM
To: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
Cc: RQTF <public-rqtf@w3.org>; public-apa@w3.org
Subject: Mapping of draft WebRTC user requirements and RFC 5194 ToIP/RTT

Hi Jason,

[+rqtf, +apa]

As promised I've spent some time reviewing and cross referencing our new WebRTC user requirements against the existing use cases in RFC 5194 which covers in detail requirements for Text Over IP (ToIP/RTT). [1] [2]

It was an interesting exercise that I also plan to do against EN 301 549 and will update our draft doc at [1]. I've updated each use case where I found either a direct mapping or a strong similarity between them.

Also in my review I think we have some candidate user requirements that can be merged and thus reduce the candidate user requirement/use case head count. I suggest that we discuss the merging option in general on our upcoming call, so agenda+ for this please.

We may find that we want to keep these as distinct requirements but we need to discuss.

Thanks.

Josh

[1] https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FAPA%2Fwiki%2FWebRTC_next_version_use_cases&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C770ecfc3254848301c2208d6fe18e53f%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636975780221349869&amp;sdata=Y9vf%2FKQkUhEr36jzC7fSFQCnK5ajpDFZ2aq9fkXsg6g%3D&amp;reserved=0

[2] https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Frfc5194%23section-5.1&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7C770ecfc3254848301c2208d6fe18e53f%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636975780221349869&amp;sdata=Of6pExGNaCGkmbHrbieclotCeio6NF9Ecks8TRqji9g%3D&amp;reserved=0

--
Emerging Web Technology Specialist/A11y (WAI/W3C)


________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________
Received on Monday, 1 July 2019 14:41:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 17 January 2023 20:26:46 UTC