Chartering discussions and DAP [Was: [HOME_NETWORK_TF ...]

Hi Robin, All,

A few comments regarding scope, charters and DAP ...

I agree there is a potential for cooperative work between the DAP WG and 
the Web&TV IG. Thus, I +1 the proposal for DAP's charter to include this 
IG in its of related W3C groups and to build a good liaison between the 
two groups.

The DAP WG and Web+TV IG have separate charters because they have 
different missions. The IG, still relatively new, appears to still have 
quite a bit of work to do regarding the tasks list in its charter's 
scope [IG-Scope]. As such, it seems a bit premature for the IG to 
propose a new deliverable for DAP.

The DAP WG still has a significant amount of work to do on the (high) 
"Priority APIs" it started (see [DAP-deliverables]). As such, I think 
DAP's primary focus should be to complete the high priority APIs (and to 
not take on any new deliverables from this IG in the near term).

After the IG has completed its tasks related to analysis, Use Cases, 
Requirements, etc., if there appears to be any standardization gaps that 
are in DAP's scope, the groups should of course then discuss how to 
proceed (with formal standardization).

-Regards, Art Barstow



Subject: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Timing of this TF (was: New TF on Home 
Networking - Call for Participants)
From: Robin Berjon <>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:43:05 +0200
Message-Id: <>

Hi all!

The TF's announcement mentioned the following:

 > Another goal for this first phase is also to identify
 > - if the requirements can be addressed by one ore more existing W3C 
 > - if a new WG is required, OR
 > - if the work is out of scope for W3C

In this respect, I would like to bring some timing-related information. 
One of the WGs that could potentially pick up work from this TF is the 
Device APIs and Policy WG (aka DAP). I don't think that we would take on 
anything that is too strongly tied to TV, but we could probably be the 
right place in which to standardise some generic aspects that are likely 
to be useful across a broad spectrum of devices (for instance, discovery).

That's all fine and well but we're on a schedule. DAP's charter runs out 
in June, and as a result we plan to have a new charter ready inside of 
May (preferably on the earlier side of that month). Since we intend to 
be strict with our charter's scope, everything that is meant to go into 
DAP needs to be included in the charter. Therefore, any requirement 
output from this TF that would be intended for DAP to pick up should be 
defined within the next few weeks.

I'm not saying this to discourage people  quite the opposite! I'm 
pretty sure that if we bang our brains together we can come up with a 
well-defined enough set of use cases and requirements in the home 
networking domain. A lot of requirements discussions tend to start meta 
with a "how do we gather requirements" discussion. I'd like to suggest 
that we keep that to a minimum, perhaps just adopting the famous "dump 
your brain into an email, refine later" methodology.

Thoughts? Screams?

Robin Berjon -

Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 15:28:24 UTC