Re: HNTF Criteria for rejecting use-cases...

My own thought on this is that the important information to send from the IG to the WGs is the priority of use cases. I'm not sure it's necessary to reject any minority use cases. The WG can decide which use cases to support.   The important thing is to let the WGs know which are the highest priority, most widely-supported use cases.



On Aug 2, 2011, at 3:52 AM, "Giuseppe Pascale" <giuseppep@opera.com<mailto:giuseppep@opera.com>> wrote:

On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 08:40:10 +0200, Russell Berkoff <r.berkoff@sisa.samsung.com<mailto:r.berkoff@sisa.samsung.com>> wrote:

Hi Giuseppe,

Russell,

On what basis is HNTF rejecting use-cases?

So far we haven't really rejected usecases, or better we have rejected those usecases that we felt either already covered or that were split in smaller use cases.
So that is what I meant for rejected in my previous mail.

Of course we may still decide to reject use cases.

I suppose "reasonable" rejection criteria is:

- vague (cant generate requirements)
- infeasible  (requirements cant be practically realized with current technology)
- merged (all requirements covered by another use-case).

Outside of these criteria should the HNTF reject any submitted use-cases which does not have one or more of these defects?

We have various opinions and approaches. Maybe the differences should be best worked throught by the Working Groups?

May want to add HNTF policy statement to the Report?

The criteria you mention above are all reasonable. Another one could be that the use case is out of scope, but I haven't seen such a problem so far.
In general, while I can see discussions and different opinions on how to actually support a given use case, I doubt we will have big discussions on use cases themselves.

Anyway, in general we need to produce a requirement document that needs to be agreed by this group (and the IG). The approval will proceed in the usual way: we will try to reach consensus, trying to address concerns when raised. If on some points we cannot reach consensus but there is a clear majority, the use case (or whatever is under discussion) get mentioned in the requirement document but also the objections are recorded.

So all the opinion will (reasonably) be mentioned. As you say, is then up for a WG to start from our inputs and move forward.

/g


Regards,
Russell Berkoff
Samsug



--
Giuseppe Pascale
TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software - Sweden