Re: [profile] Scope of the TV Profile document

HI Guiseppe,

I have two comments on the draft.

1) Overall I think the background and motivation is good, however I think we should try hard to make this as succinct a document as possible: it should not be another 100s of pages like OIPF and should not give the impression that it defines anything different from (a subset of) the overall W3C web platform. It should really just be a list of references to other specifications and perhaps some more detailed conformance requirements where these are lacking in the reference specification. I don't think we need Sections 3-6 as such. Especially an "Architecture" section will just encourage us to write stuff which will leave people wondering whether they need to understand this as something different from normal web architecture.

2) We have found it key to making our HTML5 applications work on consumer electronics devices that we consider performance as well as conformance. It may be that a given device supports a given feature but it is just too slow to be useful. Performance requirements would need to be defined in terms of specific performance tests/benchmarks and would provide guidance to implementors as to where to focus optimization efforts.

...Mark


On Jan 4, 2012, at 8:07 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:

> *** NOTE: from now on, all mails related to the TV profile SHALL be tagged with [profile]  ***
> 
> Hi all,
> I'm happy to see interest in working together on a TV profile document.
> 
> As mentioned by several people (me included), we need to agree on the scope of such document and the goals we want to achieve.
> Based on the discussion on this list, I put together a first draft
> 
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/3587643883c4/tvprofile/tv.html
> 
> Please take a look at the introduction section of this document and let me know what do you think. Feel free to point out typos and to suggest additions or changes to the text.
> 
> Once there is consensus on the goals, we are ready to move on to the next steps. Meanwhile I'll keep refining the document adding more text in the other sections so that we have starting point for further discussion
> (if you have already suggestions or comments on the rest of the documents, feel free to send them to this list, but PLEASE start a NEW discussion thread)
> 
> One last point: many of you have mentioned that a dialogue with other organizations is needed. I agree.
> I would suggest we wait to have a clear agreement on the goals and maybe a more detailed structure of the documents before starting to reach out to relevant groups. Let me know if you think we should reach out to this groups earlier (or later) instead.
> 
> Thanks,
> /g
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Giuseppe Pascale
> TV & Connected Devices
> Opera Software
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2012 20:53:08 UTC