See also: IRC log
<francois> scribe: francois
giuseppe: I'm fine with
integrating this use cases with some comments I posted on the
... Other opinions on this?
... It's just a basic description of being able to interact with a service.
<trackbot> ISSUE-4 -- Use Case: Service User Interface -- open
giuseppe: I'll merge this use case in the document
JeanClaude: I tried to address your comments, in particular the justification.
fd: can we close the issue then?
<scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to merge use case of ISSUE-4 in requirements document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-34 - Merge use case of ISSUE-4 in requirements document [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-06-14].
<trackbot> ISSUE-4 Use Case: Service User Interface closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-7 -- Use case: Service Migration -- open
giuseppe: any further comments?
JeanClaude: last time, there was misunderstanding because there's a user interface described in the use case. I moved the user interface into the radio controller only. So now the service that migrates has no user interface.
Giuseppe: the other comment was
why we'd need a specific use case for this.
... It's similar to another use case on Application Migration.
JeanClaude: ah ok, I had misunderstood your comment as applying to ISSUE-15 which I updated.
Giuseppe: OK, let me take a look at it again. If there are no other comments, we can quickly go through it next call.
Russell: Question on how the TV UA discover the other UA?
JeanClaude: A User-Agent
implements a standard service, for instance HNTFUA. When you
start a User-Agent, it discovers its peers, and then, whenever
a user requests migration, the UA can provide a list of
potential target devices.
... Then, as part of the HNTF UA, there should be a "migrate" message, taking two parameters, e.g. the application URI and some URI to retrieve the execution context, so that the application can be restarted on the other side.
Russell: So where is the HNTF UA service hosted?
JeanClaude: There should one per device/User-Agent
Russell: So how does a service discover the other HNTF UAs? What's the discovery mechanism? mDns?
JeanClaude: some discovery mechanism, yes.
Russell: You might want to state that you have a dependency on discovery here.
giuseppe: Good point, yes.
Russell: [comment on security]
JeanClaude: In our implementation at least, if anybody contacts a UA on this service, the UA checks the target UA. It would not transfer anything to a service that is not an HNTF UA.
giuseppe: We have security
concerns for all use cases.
... Action is to include Russell's comment on discovery.
... If so, once comments are applied, I'll merge it into the requirements document.
<scribe> ACTION: jc to add clarify dependency on discovery mechanism for ISSUE-7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - jc
<scribe> ACTION: Jean-Claude to add clarify dependency on discovery mechanism for ISSUE-7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-35 - Add clarify dependency on discovery mechanism for ISSUE-7 [on Jean-Claude Dufourd - due 2011-06-14].
<jcdufourd> As there are more devices in the home, some generic and some task-specific, and with varying capabilities (including different UI methods), there is a growing need to spread an application across different devices to achieve service distribution. But the service usually "enters" the home network through one particular device. The service running entirely on the initial device, as part of other use cases, can discover its environment and determine that other
JeanClaude: I added some text to clarify the use case (copied above)
giuseppe: I'm fine with that
text. Concerns from anyone?
... Can we approve this?
<scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to merge use case of ISSUE-8 in requirements document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-36 - Merge use case of ISSUE-8 in requirements document [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-06-14].
<trackbot> ISSUE-8 Use case: Service Distribution closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-12 -- Document Exposing a Service -- raised
giuseppe: any outstanding issue
... If not, let's approve the use case.
<scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to merge use case of ISSUE-12 in requirements document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-37 - Merge use case of ISSUE-12 in requirements document [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-06-14].
<trackbot> ISSUE-12 Document Exposing a Service closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-13 -- Document Responding to Requests -- raised
giuseppe: wondering whether this
use case is required. This is included in the other use
... What are people views on this?
??2: Let's just make it's covered. If it is, then let's drop it.
giuseppe: yes, it is, unless we require that two applications need to be able to communicate.
JeanClaude: I'm fine if you consider it implicit.
giuseppe: OK, I think we can close this without any further action.
<trackbot> ISSUE-13 Document Responding to Requests closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-14 -- Document Discovering a Service -- raised
giuseppe: comments on this that
need to be addressed?
... OK, I think we can merge this as well.
<scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to merge use case of ISSUE-14 in requirements document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-38 - Merge use case of ISSUE-14 in requirements document [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-06-14].
<trackbot> ISSUE-14 Document Discovering a Service closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-15 -- Document Migration -- raised
giuseppe: I had some comments,
but think you handled them. I just need to check, so will get
back to you offline.
... Is it clear now the use case, or are there still concerns?
Russell: essential difference between ISSUE-7 and ISSUE-15?
JeanClaude: The only thing you need to do when migrating a service without a UI, the only thing you need to do is backup and restore the execution context.
Russell: so if you move the UI, you have application migration?
JeanClaude: no, ISSUE-7 is also
migrating a service that exposes a service.
... Example of Media rendering on a TV moved to a computer. The media rendering on the TV has some connections. The difference is that when you move the service, it's an application migration, dealt with by ISSUE-15, plus it needs to expose the service on the target device, and then it needs to re-establish the connections.
... You need to wait before the connections are re-established.
Russell: would it be clearer to expose that in a single use case with derivatives?
JeanClaude: it was one use case and I was asked to split it.
David: Two comments. We seem to be using "documents" and "applications" interchangeably. Is it intended?
JeanClaude: no, we started with Document, but switched to Application, so all use cases have been re-written to say "application".
giuseppe: Yes, I added
definitions to the document, please check the definitions and
... They are not the same.
David: The directionality of the
move is only initiated from the phone in the case presented.
This is allowing to initiate the migration from the original
device, not from the target device.
... There might be a need for a use case where the target device serves as originator for the migration.
JeanClaude: very good idea!
Clarke: Do we need to check security here? I may not want my mobile device to be able to migrate something to my tablet for instance.
DavidMays: Yes, it raises
concerns in both directions.
... Alerts on both devices may be needed.
giuseppe: action plan would be to extend the use case for push and pull
fd: wondering about splitting the push and pull use cases instead of merging them. They sound rather different. We seem to have preferred more atomic use cases so far, which is the reason why I'm pointing that out.
giuseppe: I don't know, no strong opinion on this.
JeanClaude: you pick, I'll do whatever you want...
<scribe> ACTION: Jean-Claude to extend use case of ISSUE-15 by creating a new use case for pull scenario [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webtv-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-39 - Extend use case of ISSUE-15 by creating a new use case for pull scenario [on Jean-Claude Dufourd - due 2011-06-14].
kaz: we can probably categorize
the requirements later on from the use cases.
... Maybe we should have that categorization phase later on.
giuseppe: yes, I'm starting to believe it's better to put everything in there and go through the list again with categorization in mind later on.
fd: any more comment on ISSUE-15 actually or do we need to wait for new use case?
giuseppe: I wanted to check on comments addressed by Jean-Claude, so we'll approve it next time.
<davidmays> is this the canonical list of issues? http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/2
<trackbot> ISSUE-16 -- Web and Device Interworking -- raised
giuseppe: sorry, didn't have time
to check this. Will do it for next time.
... We'll touch on this during next call.
<trackbot> ISSUE-17 -- Use Case: Home Network Enabled User-Agent -- raised
Russell: During previous call,
there were comments to remove dependencies on UPnP, DLNA, HTML5
and so on, so I updated it.
... Quite a large use case.
... I suspect this use case can generate a number of smaller use cases.
Clarke: these use cases are basically A/V use cases, there are other use cases such as (?missed?)
Russell: The bullet point on
controlling future home network device classes would include
non A/V use cases.
... [going through the list of bullets]
<Clarke> Sorry for the noise. The other use cases could include things like lighting, thermostats and other non-AV devices
Russell: each scenario could potentially be turned in a specific use case. I'm not quite sure whether we want to accommodate 40 more issues, as it would take a long time to go through it.
giuseppe: Yes, I went quickly through this. One comment is that we need to define what a Media Player, Media Server and other terms you use mean.
Russell: In the scenario steps,
there are a bunch of functions that such components would
... [going into example of functions that a media player would need to implement]
... Question is how to submit this into the issue database.
... It's been posted relatively recently.
Jan: Looking through the steps
and you're using the terms "Web Page" but we decided to use
... Clarification on User-Agent [missed details].
Russell: I thought User Agent was
pretty well defined in W3C.
... I can clarify the part on the password. Not passed over the network. Locally, the user agent has a password database.
MattH: Device is used a lot here. Do you intend the term "device" or is "service" enough?
Russell: they can more or less be
... I think there are some distinction to make here and there. Device is a bundle of services here.
Matt: I would agree for a
definition of device as a set of services, yes.
... I'm conscious that the set of use cases here focus on the 3-box model.
... I'd be keen to see separate use case that covers the 2-box model.
Russell: the Media player can be
a 2-box use case.
... Two entities involved in that scenario.
... Three entities if a third entity controlled the two first entities.
<kaz> scribenick: kaz
giuseppep: we're out of time, so would suggest we talk about this offline or during next call
kaz: two rather urgent topics: 1. Device APIs WG charter AC review, 2. f2f of (not for this HNTF but) whole the IG in September. I'll send an email about them later
david: brief comment
... on security
... how to mention security principles for use cases?
giuseppep: my plan is considering that after our putting all the use cases in one document
giuseppep: let's discuss that as
well offline since we're out of time
... just would like to suggest split UPnP/DLNA use cases
<inserted> russell: would like to talk about the detail next week
[ adjourned ]