See also: IRC log
alex: several issues
... and also TPAC planning
... use case discussion by TPAC
all: ok
alex: we had some discussion on
MSE
... action for Colin
colin: did some work
... similar mechanism with what we've been discussing
alex: would be good to have joint
discussion with MSE guys
... who would be the best person?
... maybe Mark Watson?
kaz: before TPAC?
alex: yes
... would finalize our points before TPAC
... and we could have joint discussion during TPAC as well
colin: please not that we should not too much concentrate on MSE spec itself
alex: right. it's not our main document
colin: we should skip some of the use cases
alex: MSE use cases and communication use cases?
colin: yeah
alex: we put the use cases
together
... since 2015
colin: most use cases lack
solutions
... what we should focus is what kind of consequence we would
have
... manageable things
kaz: you mean requirements based
on the use cases?
... we should clarify requirements for specs
colin: what would be our next steps?
alex: impact of our work?
... MSE/EME is one track
... would put all our slots together
kaz: what do you mean by "next
group"?
... maybe "related groups"?
alex: possible "Cloud Browser WG" for example
colin: there are several possible options
kaz: explains the possible
options
... first of all, we should do the following:
... 1. we clarify our use cases (which we've been doing)
... 2. we clarify our requrements in detail based on the use cases
... 3. we analyze the gaps between our requirements and existing standards
... after that there are several possible options, e.g.:
... opt1) we can ask some WG to extend their spec or
... opt2) we can launch a new WG and generate a spec ourselves
colin: my personal preference is not working on "Control", etc.
alex: would clarify core/impact use cases
kaz: impact use cases are important ones?
alex: basic interactions between
cloud browser and its clent: blue lines are cloud browser use
cases
... green line : shift of the browser into the cloud (no local
execution available) is impact useces
kaz: would suggest change the
name
... green one should be "cloud-only use cases"
... and blue one should be "hybrid (cloud/client interaction)
use cases"
... in any case, we should clarify uc, req, gaps
... also better to rename the use case categories
colin: not sure
kaz: we should add some more
descriptions to those two categories: impact use cases and
cloud browser use cases
... and after that we could give them nicer names
colin: btw, will you attend TPAC?
alex: planning to come
colin: arranging it
... Mon-Thu
chris: will be there
... leaving Friday night
... Sat-Fri
alex: publication by TPAC?
... would make control/state/session/communication more
generic
... less dependent on the cloud browser architecture
... any updates?
colin: just the structure
... no concrete changes with the content
alex: can you work on
requirements for the use cases?
... I myself also can work on MSE use cases
colin: can come up with some requirements
alex: ok
kaz: btw, do we want to continue
to work with wiki?
... or would start with using GitHub?
colin: wondering about that
kaz: we already have a repo for
the Web&TV IG
... but we can create a new repo for the
Media&Entertainment IG
... should be discussed during the whole IG call next week or
the after
... please respond to the doodle poll for the call
colin: how to transition to GH?
kaz: we can convert the content from wiki to HTML on GitHub anytime
colin: ok
alex: tx for working on this
kaz: btw, do we want to ask Chris
to start reviews for accessibility?
... accessibility use cases and also other use cases from
accessibility viewpoint
... and clarify the requirements
chris: what would be the starting point?
alex: there is a separate accessibility use case page at: https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Use_case_for_accessibility
... also there are other use cases to be reviewed by accessibility viewpoint linked from: https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_TF/UseCases
chris: ok
alex: you could update the
accessibility use cases as well
... we can do both Colin's work and Chris's work in
parallel
kaz: for example, we can use the
1st part for Colin
... and the 2nd part for Chris
all: ok
chris: sometimes difficult to
understand specific features
... so maybe would add some notes
... and describe general requirements
alex: that's fine
... good to start with general requirements
... let's work on them by the next call in 2 weeks (=August
23rd)
[ adjourned ]