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

MSE use cases

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 ]