RE: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Home Network Technologies

Dear Bob Lund,

> I hope the previous sentence was intended to say "... though any other Home
> Network technologies would __not__ be excluded ...". For industry, and W3C,
> acceptance, I think it is important to support those home networking
> technologies being adopted in the market place.

Please accept my apology. Of course, my intention was "any other Home Network technologies would __not__ be excluded ..."

Best Regards.

-***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***--***---***---***-
Tatsuya Igarashi (Tatsuya.Igarashi@jp.sony.com)
NS Development Dept. Technology Development Group
Sony Corporation
(Voice) +81-3-5435-3252 (Fax) +81-3-5435-3274 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Lund [mailto:B.Lund@CableLabs.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 1:28 AM
> To: Igarashi, Tatsuya; Giuseppe Pascale; public-web-and-tv@w3.org;
> Russell Berkoff
> Subject: RE: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Home Network Technologies
> 
> Please see inline below
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-web-and-tv-request@w3.org [mailto:public-web-and-tv-
> > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Igarashi, Tatsuya
> > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 6:48 AM
> > To: Giuseppe Pascale; public-web-and-tv@w3.org; Russell Berkoff
> > Subject: RE: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Home Network Technologies
> >
> > Hi Giuseppe and Russell,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > > Hi Giuseppe,
> > > Hi Russell, thanks for your comment and let me clarify my point
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I certainly didn’t intend to ignore or preclude W3C provisioning of
> > > > alternative Home Network technologies.
> > > >
> > > > However, phrases like "generic" and "also works with" could imply
> > > > something more (such as convergence or interoperability of HN
> > > > technologies). The use cases (and ecosystem impact) for doing this
> > > > kind of convergence at a spec level (vs a device bridges between
> > > > multiple HN
> > > > technologies) would need to be considered very carefully.
> > > >
> > > I agree. My point was that the analysis should start looking at a
> > > wider scope than just UPnP, looking if some convergence is possible
> > > and at which level. One possible outcome could be that this
> > > convergence is possible just in same areas or is not possible at all.
> > >
> > > I would encourage TF participants to share their opinion on this
> > point.
> > >
> >
> > In my understanding, the TF will not discuss the provision of
> > alternative Home Network technologies. Rather, it will discuss a W3C
> > standard of home network API that an web application controls the device
> > compliant with existing Home Network technologies.
> 
> I think the ultimate goal should be an API that will work with the home
> network technologies that are expected to be in use.
> >
> > It is preferable that the home network API is very generic and can apply
> > any Home Network technologies, but the W3C solution has to specify a
> > basic framework, such as, device discovery, for interoperability. I
> > think that the UPnP industrial standard is a good starting point for the
> > TF discussions, though any other Home Network technologies would be
> > excluded for the discussion.
> 
> I hope the previous sentence was intended to say "... though any other Home
> Network technologies would __not__ be excluded ...". For industry, and W3C,
> acceptance, I think it is important to support those home networking
> technologies being adopted in the market place.
> 
> >
> > In terms of the phases like, "generic" and "also works with",  I
> > supposed that any UPnP device-types and service-types should be
> > supported by the API if the solution is based on UPnP.  If there are the
> > requirements specific to a certain UPnP device-type, such as MediaServer
> > and MediaRender,  it would be another discussion from the basic
> > framework.
> 
> We have done some initial investigation that suggests that device and
> service discovery for multiple home network technologies could be exposed
> in a generic way. More investigation is needed to determine if service
> specific actions can be exposed in a common way. For this reason, it appears
> to make sense to think about a basic framework for discovery and a more
> extended framework related to service actions.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bob Lund
> CableLabs
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> >
> -***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***--***---***---***-
> > Tatsuya Igarashi (Tatsuya.Igarashi@jp.sony.com) NS Development Dept.
> > Technology Development Group Sony Corporation
> > (Voice) +81-3-5435-3252 (Fax) +81-3-5435-3274
> >
> >

Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2011 01:09:22 UTC