Scope of Verified caller

[DanXu-ChinaTelecom]

What type of PR is this?

Add one of the following kinds:

• documentation

What this PR does / why we need it:

describe the scope of Verified caller

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #5

Special notes for reviewers:

Changelog input

 release-note

Additional documentation

This section can be blank.

docs

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: DanXu-ChinaTelecom / name: Dan Xu (36b314d)

[hdamker]

@DanXu-ChinaTelecom Great idea to have a more detailed scope description within the documentation! You might want to consider the markdown format (with .md) as this is the format we agreed on in the project and it is easy to use (cf. https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/writing-on-github/getting-started-with-writing-and-formatting-on-github/basic-writing-and-formatting-syntax)

[hdamker]

@DanXu-ChinaTelecom And don't hesitate to reach out @wrathwolf or @eharrison24 if there are question regarding EasyCLA.

[wrathwolf]

Hello @DanXu-ChinaTelecom, China Telecom still does not have a CLA Manager. Please see our EasyCLA documentation at https://docs.linuxfoundation.org/lfx/easycla/v2-current/getting-started to resolve this issue.

[DanXu-ChinaTelecom]

@wrathwolf China Telecom has the CLA Manager Mr Xiangyang Zhang

[hdamker]

/easycla

[stroncoso-quobis]

Hi team
@camaraproject/verified-caller_codeowners

After merge of #29 I think that we finally get an agreement on the scope of the API with two use cases:

Use case 1: As an application developer belonging to an enterprise, I want to register the display name to be announced for specified caller phone number in the Calling ID solution that I want to use.
Use case 2: As an application developer belonging to an enterprise, I want to make my call verified and make the calling id solution displaying a branded annoucement previously registered.

In order to simplify management, should we close this issue? Or maybe we should add extra use cases?
It will be great to have the feedback of the original issuers. Do you consider that current definition cover your use cases?

Best regards,