RE: [apis] Cross-review of HNReq document and current list of use cases

Hi Olivier,

We really appreciate your review and great work, which are very helpful.

Today, we had the CC for about 95 minutes. We went over those 7 use cases, and summarized requirements through the discussion. Several potential gaps were also found, such as to enrich Push notification (current Push spec is too simple), and payment API related methods (currently a work in progress in Payment API TF), etc. So the good news is that we had a decent progress.

Kaz has sent the minutes and you can review the minutes for more details.

I am going to document those requirements that we discussed and summarized today, and the group can further review and polish, as well as moving on to other use cases, and possibly from the ones in HNReq as you suggested.

Let me know if you have questions, and I can clarify.

Thank you very much
Bin

-----Original Message-----
From: Olivier Thereaux [mailto:Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:50 AM
To: HU, BIN
Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org IG
Subject: Re: [apis] Cross-review of HNReq document and current list of use cases

Hi Bin,

On 10 Jul 2013, at 06:33, "HU, BIN" <bh526r@att.com> wrote:
> Speaking of "gap", in my view, the gaps are the "requirements" that haven't been addressed by any technical specification yet. HNReq is not a technical specification, but more like a set or collection of proposed solutions. Let alone it is also not clear whether those solution-looking use cases in HNReq are "gaps" or not. I personally don't think so. That's why comparing our use cases with HNReq won't help us at all. It will just end up with "my solution can solve your use case".

I agree with you. We are, however, faced with the question of how we deal with the recently submitted use cases without repeating all the work already done in the HN task force. If anything, I hope my review serves to point out that maybe we do not need to spend a lot of time on Use Cases, but instead move on to requirements and gap analysis.

> I suggest that the more effective approach is to focus on "requirement" and related gaps.
> - As the first step, it is more important to summarize the concrete requirement from those use cases.

Yes, absolutely. I'd like the group to consider doing that exercise not only from our list of use cases, but also from the ones in HNReq.

Thanks,
Olivier


-----------------------------
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in
error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to
this.
-----------------------------

Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 17:57:59 UTC