Subject: [rtcweb] WG adoption for Use Case document

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:00:44 +0200

WG,

We would like to adopt a WG document with the purpose for describing use
cases for the RTCWEB work. This document would be targeted as
publication as an Inforamtional RFC eventually.

The candidate document for this is:
Web Real-Time Communication Use-cases and Requirements
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-holmberg-rtcweb-ucreqs/

Based on our interim last week it was clear that there are some use
cases that clearly needs development. However, the WG chairs believe
that future development of the document can be done as WG item.

WG participants please indicate if you agree in adopting this document
as a basis, or if not, what the short comings you would like to see
addressed prior to adoption. Once more, the document will be continued
to be developed under the WG control and this is far from any final
version.

Please provide your view no later than Friday the 24th.

Best Regards

Magnus Westerlund
WG chair

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Randell Jesup <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 07:29:37 -0400

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-holmberg-rtcweb-ucreqs/

Agreed

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:59:29 -0500

I think the document is a good starting point, although, I personally would
prefer that the mapping would should the use cases that were used to derive
the requirements versus the requirements that are derived from the use case.
 Otherise, you have to   search through the use cases to see the one from
which the requirement was derived. Or perhaps having the mapping both
directions.

Also, I would suggest some reformatting so that new use cases can be easily
added - i.e., it doesn't look like the list is a result of the
<list>...</list> xml formatting. If that's not the case, I still don't like
this dashy list style.

Regards,
Mary.

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:00 AM, Magnus Westerlund <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 14:26:15 +0200

Hi Mary,
	
>I think the document is a good starting point, although, I personally would prefer that the mapping would should the use cases that were used to derive the requirements versus the requirements 
>that are derived from the use case. 

We can fix that.

>Otherise, you have to   search through the use cases to see the one from which the requirement was derived. Or perhaps having the mapping both directions.   
>
>Also, I would suggest some reformatting so that new use cases can be easily added - i.e., it doesn't look like the list is a result of the <list>...</list> xml formatting. If that's not the 
>case, I still don't like this dashy list style. 

We can fix that too.

Thanks!

Regards,

Christer

	
	On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:00 AM, Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]> wrote:

		WG,

		

		
		Best Regards
		
		Magnus Westerlund
		WG chair

---

From: Anil SRIVASTAVA <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:33:15 -0700

Agreed. 

Anil

---

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 10:20:51 +0200

I agree with adopting the document as a WG starting point.

Naturally, I expect multiple use cases to be added (and perhaps even 
some use cases marked up with "RTCWEB can't do this") before we're finished.

             Harald

---

From: Salvatore Loreto <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:30:42 +0300

+1

---

From: "Hutton, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:11:02 +0200

I also agree with adopting this document and will contribute to the development of the use cases.

Regards
Andy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand
> Sent: 20 June 2011 09:21
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG adoption for Use Case document
>

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 16:50:05 +0200

WG,

I have reviewed the input from the WG participants, and there has all
been in support for adopting this document as WG item. So hereby I
declare https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-holmberg-rtcweb-ucreqs/ a
WG document. At this point the WG chairs request no changes in the
document editor team.

In addition there has been input on how to improve the document which we
request the editors to take into account.

Editors, please submit the document as
draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-00.txt.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund
WG chair

-- 

Magnus Westerlund