Subject: [clue] #41: OPEN-5. New Requirement - 3D

From: "clue issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:05:44 -0000

#41: OPEN-5.  New Requirement - 3D

 Need to add requirement for three dimensions in the right
 place

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |      Owner:  draft-ietf-clue-
  [email-masked]         |  telepresence-
     Type:  enhancement              |  [email-masked]
 Priority:  minor                    |     Status:  new
Component:  telepresence-            |  Milestone:  milestone1
  requirements                       |    Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document       |   Keywords:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/clue/trac/ticket/41>
clue <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/clue/>

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:44:46 -0500

I propose to close this issue.  We don't have a use case and it hasn't been
discussed in the context of the framework.  This was something we talked
about early on, but I do not believe it's required for our initial
deliverables.

If you have concerns about closing this issue, then please respond no later
than August 12, 2013.

Thanks,
Mary.

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:30:47 -0400

Mary,

ISTM we went to quite a bit of trouble to define point of capture and 
axis of capture in addition to area of capture because it was thought to 
be necessary to perform geometric corrections/mappings of the video. 
This means that we acknowledge that the displays may not be coplanar, 
and the areas of capture may not be coplanar. That all makes sense only 
in 3D.

So I don't think dropping 3D is a decision to be made lightly.

	Thanks,
	Paul

On 7/23/13 1:44 PM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> I propose to close this issue.  We don't have a use case and it hasn't
> been discussed in the context of the framework.  This was something we
> talked about early on, but I do not believe it's required for our
> initial deliverables.
>
> If you have concerns about closing this issue, then please respond no
> later than August 12, 2013.
>
> Thanks,
> Mary.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:05 AM, clue issue tracker
> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>>
> wrote:
>
>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>        |  telepresence-
>     <mailto:[email-masked]>
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:27:38 -0500

The question then is whether we need an explicit, unique requirement for
the solution in order to support 3D?

 This issue was added to the requirements document 21 months ago.  If we go
back to the charts presented at IETF-82 (November, 2011) it looks like it's
already been discussed (and I think resolved):
 http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/clue-1.pdf

Here's the specific comments on addressing OPEN-5:

Authors propose (slide 3):
REQMT-1d: The solution MUST support a means to identify the extent of
individual video captures in three dimensions

REQMT-2e: The solution MUST support a means to identify the extent of
individual audio captures in three dimensions.

IN addition, the following is proposed on slide 4:

REQMT-1c: The solution MUST support a means to identify the point of
capture of individual video captures in three dimensions

REQMT-2d: The solution MUST support a means to identify the point of
capture of individual audio captures in three dimensions.

So, it looks to me that requirements were already added to address this
issue and thus we should close the issue:
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url2=draft-ietf-clue-telepresence-requirements-02.txt

I'm thinking the ball was dropped as Allyn was no longer participating by
IETF-83.  You can see that we never discussed this document again after
IETF-82.

Mary.

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Mary,
>
> ISTM we went to quite a bit of trouble to define point of capture and axis
> of capture in addition to area of capture because it was thought to be
> necessary to perform geometric corrections/mappings of the video. This
> means that we acknowledge that the displays may not be coplanar, and the
> areas of capture may not be coplanar. That all makes sense only in 3D.
>
>> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked].**ietf.org<[email-masked]>
>> >>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     ------------------------------**-------+----------------------**
>> ---------------
>>     [email-masked] <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@**gmail.com<[email-masked]>
>> >
>>        |  telepresence-
>>     <mailto:requirements@tools.**ietf.org <[email-masked]>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------**-------+----------------------**
>> ---------------
>>
>>     Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/**wg/clue/trac/ticket/41<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/clue/trac/ticket/41>
>> >
>>     clue <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/**clue/<http://tools.ietf.org/wg/clue/>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> clue mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/clue<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue>
>>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> clue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/clue<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue>
>