On 6/6/12 1:55 PM, ext Tobie Langel wrote:
Hi,
I recently stumbled upon a number of use case and requirements docs (such
as MediaStream Capture Scenarios[1] or HTML Speech XG[2]) that were
published as officially looking W3C documents (for whatever that means, at
least, it's not a page on a Wiki).
I think that's tremendously useful, especially for authors who can have a
much better understanding of the purpose of a specification that way (and
therefore use it the right way and for the right purpose).
It's also a smart way to get authors involved without corrupting them into
thinking like spec writers or implementors.
What are the WebApps WG's plans with regards to that (if any)?
I think our [Charter] sets a clear expectation that our new specs will
have some type of requirements and use cases and as a spec transitions
to Last Call, the group should identify the requirements the spec addresses.
There a number of ways to document the UCs and reqs. For example, Bryan
is using a wiki for the Push API. Anne included requirements and use
cases directly in the CORS spec (although I think they were moved out
before CR). Marcos took the higher overhead route of publishing widget
requirements as a TR. I don't think anyone has done so but a text file
in Hg could also be sufficient as would be an email (thread).
Which mechanism is used largely depends on how much time the
protagonists are willing to spend. If anyone wants to go the TR route,
we can certainly do that and we'd use the normal CfC process to gauge
consensus.
-Thanks, AB
[Charter] http://www.w3.org/2012/webapps/charter/#others
