RE: [apis] Update HNReq note or publish new document

The essential is "requirement and gap analysis". So we should focus on the "requirement" that is not covered by HNReq note, which is part of the process of "gap analysis".

To me, the result of "requirement gaps" is the goal we should march to. So in summary, we should document:

- requirement gaps
- if requirements are covered in HNReq, list the status of those requirement, e.g.: which requirement is sent to which WG, and targeted to which release of which spec?

Thanks
Bin

-----Original Message-----
From: Olivier Thereaux [mailto:Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk] 
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:56 AM
To: JC Verdié
Cc: public-web-and-tv
Subject: Re: [apis] Update HNReq note or publish new document

Hi JC, all

On 19 Sep 2013, at 15:27, JC Verdié <jc.verdie@mstarsemi.com> wrote:
> I would like the TF to discuss and decide the most effective way forward:
>>
>> 1. Continue with our current list of use cases and requirements, making
>> sure we take into account the work already done by the HNTF.
>>
>> 2. "take over" the HNReq note. This would probably imply changing its name
>> (our current scope is often wider the home network) and merging use cases
>> and requirements into a single list on which we would subsequently iterate
>
> What about:
> 3 - dismiss the use cases we have which duplicate those handled by HNReq, assuming they'll accept our inputs in case this is a 99% duplicate and not a carbon-copy. focus on the use cases which are not in HNReq scope

Good suggestion, I agree this is the way to go.

I suspect your suggestion is somewhat orthogonal to the choice between 1 (create a new document as input to working groups and the world) and 2 (update/rename a document already out there) so we probably will have to decide on that too.

Any other opinion in the group?

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 Thursday, 19 September 2013 16:37:07 UTC