Refining the TC53 Scope of Work Statement

[jorydotcom]

Capturing this issue from our plenary discussion, we refined the scope a bit in conversation and I believe @phoddie has the action item to start this with a summary of the description he gave during the meeting.

For the deliverable here, how about we add the scope to the README of this repo via PR, and submit that to Ecma once its landed?

---

edit: added scope from website

Scope:

Internet of Things (IoT) is becoming a reality, and with it, the appearance of small intelligent devices linked together by large data networks to data centers collecting and analyzing “big data”. A sizable category of such intelligent devices are in form of so called wearables.

Wearable sensor-based systems can comprise various types of small sensors, transmission modules and processing capabilities, and can thus capture various information ranging from monitoring of bodily activities to blood pressure, body temperature and heart rate in wearable devices, and external temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, location, and even altitude in small intelligent devices.

The work of TC53 intends not to use patents or if so then only royalty free patents. To aid in achieving that objective, this TC is operating under the Royalty-Free Patent Policy which is available here.

Programme of work:

1. To define requirements for the needed interfaces and protocols based on use cases.
2. To establish communication with user communities and other standardization bodies to harmonize and ensure interoperability (e. g. JTC 1/SC 41, IEC TC124, ITU-T SG20, W3C, etc.).
3. To continue to develop relevant pre-standardization material on wearable technologies.
4. To study the impact on privacy and data security.
5. To launch specific TGs as the need arises.
   Standardization activities that would lead to an ECMAScript-based wearables platform and extensions to ECMAScript.
6. To study existing standardization work on the definition of formats of sensor data for general data interchange.

[patrickluthi]

As mentioned in today's teleconference, a quick and editorial change not requiring formal approval would be to reorder the words in the title of the TC to say: Sensor-based Devices and Smart Wearable Systems. Any thoughts?

[aforrer999]

My 2ct: The title may be shortened, because:

• Sensor-based: A wearable systems may be based on actors as well. Why should this work be restricted to sensors?
• Smart: ex-hyped and vague word. I think it brings no benefit here. Or what would the be the measurable KPIs to classify devices as smart or "unsmart"?

[jorydotcom]

Just occurred to me that posting the current scope as stated on the website on this issue might be helpful. Updated for easier reference!

[phoddie]

I share Adreas' dislike of the term "smart". If we eliminate the word smart, we are left with "wearables" which is seems to imply a broader scope than intended. My feeling is we should eliminate "smart" as part of an overhaul. Patrick's proposal to simply swap the two pieces seems like a good, quick fix that we should consider doing while we take the time to address the bigger naming challenges.

[phoddie]

FWIW -- we are not alone. The IEEE Consumer Electronics Society is in the process of changing their name to Consumer Technology Society. Their rationale includes several points that appear relevant to our situation:

• To have a name that does not limit the perceived scope of the Society.
• To better align the Society area of technical interest with changes in the industry.
• We have been witnessing the evolution of the consumer electronics as a hardware driven community, to a more evolved software driven and user experience orientated community.
• To change the perception that “IEEE Consumer Electronics Society” is a hardware and circuits only society.
• The Society’s field of interest has become highly multidisciplinary, reflecting the fast changing industry that integrates emerging technologies.
• To attract new members while maintaining the retention of the current members.
• To avoid mixing up IEEE CES with CTA CES (Consumer Technology Association Consumer Electronics Show).
• Next step: we are in to the process of filing a notice for the name change with the IEEE Technical Activities Board (TAB). The case for our Society name change for TAB approval will be presented at the upcoming TAB Meetings on 21-22 June, 2019, in Atlanta, GA, USA.

[BobFrankston]

Putting on my CE Society hat – not that CTA itself is name change done in 2015. It used to be CEA.

(Alas, the ACM is still the Association for Computing Machinery – some traditions die hard)

[BobFrankston]

Is there a more generic term than “wearable”? “Lean devices” is a generic term that can include by low power and low capability without having to include both. Bob Frankston <http://frankston.com/> http://Frankston.com From: Peter Hoddie <notifications@github.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 13:43 To: EcmaTC53/admin <admin@noreply.github.com> Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com> Subject: Re: [EcmaTC53/admin] Refining the TC53 Scope of Work Statement (#4) I share Adreas' dislike of the term "smart". If we eliminate the word smart, we are left with "wearables" which is seems to imply a broader scope than intended. My feeling is we should eliminate "smart" as part of an overhaul. Patrick's proposal to simply swap the two pieces seems like a good, quick fix that we should consider doing while we take the time to address the bigger naming challenges. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#4 (comment)> , or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFPHNNcuMhYhFvcyaSoCjaWlnRNhyzXEks5vfiKUgaJpZM4bXHZm> . <https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AFPHNMzOx596Nr46XbAM24TMolovqeNZks5vfiKUgaJpZM4bXHZm.gif>

[dtex]

The Name and Scope have been updated.

It appears to me that the Programme of Work still holds true and doesn't necessarily need to be updated.

Do y'all agree?