- From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 13:31:39 -0400
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51E6D4FB.9080307@bbs.darktech.org>
Hi Harald, On 17/07/2013 5:42 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> >> 1. Section 4 states: "It is assumed that the user applications are >> executed on a browser". This assertion flies in the face of many >> of our use-cases. >> > I think I have to ask you to explain that. As far as I can tell, every > use case in that document executes on a browser (but often > communicates with non-browser components). I argue that there is a very high demand for mobile to mobile communication (no browser involved) and headless (server) peers. WebRTC 1.0 should take that into consideration, even if the native API only ends up as part of WebRTC 2.0. >> 1. Without API examples, there is no feedback mechanism of how >> good/bad the API fits our use-cases. Recent conversations >> highlight why need such a mechanism. >> > But those examples don't belong in the use cases and requirements > document; they might belong in a document showing how the API > satisfies the use cases. >> >> 1. The document fails to explain the reasoning behind the design >> decisions that were made. >> > The -overview document is the place to explain design decisions. Use > cases documents are not supposed to be the place where you make > design; they guide design, they don't mandate it. > I am expecting a one or more (ideally one) document that will: * Enumerate the use-cases. * List one or more APIs that satisfy each use-case. * Reference one or more unit tests for each use-case which demonstrate how the API implementing the use-case. * Enumerate the design decisions, referencing one or more use-cases as justification. * It's perfectly alright to list design decisions without use-cases as justification, but obviously it is much easier for the community to suggest alternatives in such a case. If you do this, you will get a good feedback mechanism between use-cases and the API design. If you find that typical use-cases result in a very convoluted code then you will know that the design needs to be refactored. It also saves a lot of unnecessary discussion on the mailing list, as you can answer most questions by pointing people to this document. Gili
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2013 17:32:19 UTC