17:01:22 RRSAgent has joined #auto 17:01:22 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-irc 17:01:40 urata_access has joined #auto 17:02:01 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Paul_Boyes, Peter_Winzell, Shinjiro_Urata 17:02:27 present+ Adam_Crofts 17:05:01 Meeting: Automotive WG 17:05:06 Chair: Paul, Peter 17:06:05 present+ Patrick 17:06:12 present+ Song_Li 17:07:43 paul: don't have concrete agenda items but can talk about the updates 17:08:12 ... spec issues, reviews, etc. 17:08:59 kaz: we can briefly check the status and confirm the policy 17:09:19 paul: Kevin and Adam for spec 17:09:39 ... basically, VW has just joined W3C 17:09:44 AdamC has joined #auto 17:10:19 ... the question in Burlingame was that we were working on our Charter 17:10:29 present+ Kevin, Ted 17:10:57 ... we have discussed with VW guys 17:11:29 ... the Automotive BG is working on new proposals 17:11:49 ... creates reports and donates ideas to the WG 17:12:00 ... so the approach is working with the BG first 17:12:13 ... happy to have another OEM 17:12:22 ... that's my summary 17:12:55 ted: VIWI includes not only vehicle information but media information, etc. 17:13:31 ... VW was interested in volunteering for the vehicle signal side as well 17:14:29 patrick: from our side, this is a good path to take 17:14:42 ... don't want to influence the spec itself at the moment 17:15:12 ... VIWI is something the BG could be interested 17:15:22 ... we need feedback 17:15:35 ... just vehicle information is not enough 17:15:50 ... feedback from the BG and the community would make perfect sense 17:16:15 kevin: welcome VW's participation 17:16:18 ... tx for joining us 17:16:30 ... the RESTful interface is interesting 17:16:42 ... working within the BG first would be a good approach 17:16:48 patrick: tx! 17:17:05 peter: really great to have VW on board! 17:17:28 paul: great! 17:17:56 ... btw, I saw comments for the proposed new Charter 17:18:07 ... what's the update? 17:18:19 ted: responded to the commenter 17:18:50 ... initial misunderstanding was using cloud services from the vehicle using the interface 17:19:06 peter: Rudi made some statement 17:19:22 ... found it's kind of defensive 17:19:46 ... need to explain the misunderstood point 17:20:11 ... didn't see any more responses other than Rudi and Wonsuk 17:20:30 ted: we should be fine 17:20:43 paul: only one objection? 17:20:44 ted: yes 17:21:17 paul: conversation with them? 17:21:25 ted: know the commenter 17:21:42 ... will work for the objection 17:22:20 ... we should incorporate feedback 17:22:52 ... very busy this week but will talk with them 17:23:44 ... another point is VW's submitting their VIWI proposal to W3C as a Member submission 17:24:10 ... so that we can get feedback from the community 17:24:26 patrcick: how to do that? 17:24:36 ted: there is a specific procedure 17:24:44 ... write a template for the submission 17:24:52 ... can help you 17:25:34 patrick: we can do that but is that the most common way? 17:25:41 s/patrcick:/patrick:/ 17:25:52 ... would be easy to use the common path 17:26:23 ... we need some kind of extra agreement within the company 17:27:00 ted: there are two paths: 1. BG report (discussion within the BG) and 2. Member submission 17:27:23 patrick: ok 17:27:36 paul: anything else on this topic? 17:27:38 (none) 17:27:51 paul: the next topic is issues with the spec 17:28:14 ... JSON schema and WebIDL? 17:28:32 adam: proposal on equivalent way 17:28:41 ... machine readable 17:29:16 ... maybe we should go with the approach with WebIDL and think about how to apply JSON Schema 17:29:30 ... JSON Schema is quite good way 17:29:52 kevin: pros and cons with the both 17:30:13 Paul has joined #auto 17:30:13 https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/99 17:30:46 patrick: there is always object definition 17:30:59 ... JSON Schema on our side is the foundation 17:31:20 ... could generate human readable WebIDL based on that 17:31:31 ... we're generating that ourselves 17:31:39 adam: that's encouraging 17:32:05 paul: makes sense to me 17:33:17 kevin: good idea to change something obvious and see it 17:33:31 paul: what about the spec actions? 17:33:48 ... any comments? 17:34:51 ... simple implementations? 17:35:11 ... testing? 17:35:18 q+ 17:36:24 ... that's the way to go 17:36:38 ... have not got many comments for the FPWD yet 17:36:50 kevin: what about the client spec? 17:37:21 paul: Powell is busy for a while 17:37:56 https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/91 17:37:59 adam: can take an action item for issue 91 17:38:18 paul: there are quite a few action items 17:39:01 ... should go through during the next call 17:39:18 ... Dec. 6 17:39:30 ... very late for Adam and Patrick, though 17:39:54 ... and we have another action for the client spec and need to ping Powell 17:40:16 ... high-level API for Web developers 17:41:19 kaz: regarding testing, Hira-san mentioned he and Urata san were interested in testing 17:41:36 urata: right 17:41:50 ... I'm creating a server prototype for initial testing 17:42:03 ... can make contribution for our testing 17:42:07 paul: great 17:42:24 urata: one question is that the W3C testing environment is for usual Web browsers 17:42:42 ... on the other hand, the vehicle spec is not for usual browsers 17:42:52 paul: we have a framework for testing servers 17:42:59 ... maybe I can provide that 17:43:07 q? 17:43:08 q- 17:43:21 ... let me ask Jeff about that 17:43:33 ... might help since there is same patter 17:43:37 s/patter/pattern/ 17:43:40 urata: great 17:43:56 ... also there is test mechanism for Node.js 17:44:04 ... maybe that would be useful 17:44:15 paul: Patrick, do you have any mechanism? 17:44:23 patrick: regular Web tools 17:44:37 ... we use REST 17:44:50 paul: right 17:45:00 ... will talk with our QA team 17:45:22 ... may have example tests 17:45:51 patrick: postman automated tests 17:46:06 ... continuous integration 17:46:23 ... UI tool 17:46:41 ... we're doing HTTP and WebSocket is extension with our implementation, though 17:46:53 paul: the basic framework is similar 17:47:16 ... would be helpful 17:47:38 peter: what would we test? 17:47:49 ... implementation or spec? 17:48:21 paul: basically testing the sections of the spec 17:48:45 peter: ok. we're not testing the implementations 17:49:03 paul: implementations meet the spec 17:49:18 peter: an issue on testing I created on GitHub 17:49:29 paul: issue 75 17:49:42 https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/75 17:49:48 https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/75 17:50:01 peter: Urata-san, can you describe what are you planning to do? 17:50:09 urata: about the testing? 17:50:11 peter: yes 17:50:25 urata: creating a prototype implementation first 17:50:34 ... and then create test suite 17:50:46 ... that's what I want to try 17:50:59 paul: one of the deliverables 17:51:23 ... we need two implementations 17:51:45 ... the test need to be doable 17:52:25 kaz: we need to be able to point to two implementations of the spec 17:52:42 ... to see implementability and interoperability of the spec 17:53:12 kevin: one thing to see is VSS implementation could be a reference one 17:53:50 paul: test against mach server and test against data generator 17:54:05 ... what are you doing with VSS, Urata-san? 17:54:11 ... how do you implement it? 17:54:23 urata: I'm creating a VSS server using Node.js 17:54:43 ... need some data source as an alternative of the actual vehicle 17:55:02 ... can test the implementation using the mocked-up data 17:55:16 ... so I have a VSS server and an emulation server 17:55:20 paul: great 17:55:42 ... sounds like ACCESS is doing an implementation 17:55:49 ... Melco as well, Peter 17:56:18 ... VSS as a data model 17:56:36 ... people can contribute to implementations 17:56:41 ... I would do my best as well 17:58:17 ... next meeting on Dec. 6 17:59:02 kaz: regarding testing, I'll ask TV guys about their knowledge about testing environment as well 17:59:04 paul: ok 17:59:07 [ adjourned ] 17:59:14 rrsagent, make log public 17:59:36 rrsagent, draft minutes 17:59:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-minutes.html kaz 18:00:43 i/concrete agenda/topic: Agenda/ 18:01:36 s/Agenda/Agenda and Welcoming VW/ 18:01:39 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:01:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-minutes.html kaz 18:02:17 i/comments for the/topic: WG Charter Update/ 18:02:19 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:02:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-minutes.html kaz 18:03:31 i/another point/topic: Possible Member Submission for VIWI Proposal/ 18:03:32 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:03:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-minutes.html kaz 18:04:36 i/the next topic is/topic: Issues with the Spec/ 18:04:36 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:04:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-minutes.html kaz 18:05:22 i/regarding testing/topic: Testing/ 18:05:24 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:05:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/15-auto-minutes.html kaz 18:06:47 rrsagent, bye 18:06:47 I see no action items