Re: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Some comments on the open issues [ISSUE-4 only]

On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 10:32:09 +0200, Jean-Claude Dufourd  
<> wrote:

> On 3/6/11 17:14 , Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
>> ** Service User Interface (ISSUE-4)
>> As we have discussed few times, this could overlap with ISSUE-17 (UPnP)  
>> if that use cases is rephrased, but it could also be a superset of it.
>> We can either approve it as is and later decide to drop it if the  
>> outcome of ISSUE-17 is generic enough to cover this or we can wait with  
>> this until ISSUE-17 is solved.
>> @JC, Russel, any opinion on this?
> JCD: I believe ISSUE-4 is very basic and completely independant of the  
> choice of a discovery and service protocol.
> As such, I recommend to approve it and integrate it in the requirements.
> It is "mandatory".
> I mean: who does not want the HNTF user agent to be able to provide  
> interfaces to discoverable services ?

The problem is not the validity of the use case itself but if there are  
other usecases that overlap with it and if it should be more "verbose".
Anyway I'm fine to approve it and resolve any overlap later on.

I would propose though some changes to make it follow a little bit more  
the approved template [1]:
- incorporate the "implementation" section in the description
- remove any reference to UPnP from the implementation section (since we  
will probably have a separate contribution on this topic)
- add the need/justification section from the template, in particular try  
to answer the questions:
* Why were you not able to use only existing standards to accomplish this?
* What might you suggest could be standardized?



> Best regards
> JC

Giuseppe Pascale
TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software - Sweden

Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 12:05:37 UTC