Automotive and Web Platform BG

09 Aug 2016

See also: IRC log


Ted, Kaz, Paul, Qing_An, Ryan, Wonsuk



Qing: hope to have something to review at TPAC meeting
... plan is to have a first draft end of August
... data format for POI and LBS map results
... which will be the response provided for user location searches

Wonsuk: LBS tf said they are mostly focusing on the data format definitions

Qing: after the format is more stable we will work on API, expecting that to get started in October

Wonsuk: any questions or comments on LBS tf update report?

Qing: is it possible to make a BG report when we have our draft of LBS data formats?

Wonsuk: I believe so
... provided there is support from the group

Kaz: I was wondering about the relationship between this LBS work and the existing W3C Geolocation work

Wonsuk: I haven't followed recently the GeoLoc work at W3C
... and believe GeoFencing work isn't progressing

Kaz: there should be some additional information in our automotive work than GeoLocation information

Ted: my recollection from previous TPAC session with that WG is that basically we should do our own thing

Paul: that was my understanding as well

Kaz: right. my point is not that we need to reuse the geolocation mechanism but that we need to explain what we expect for location-based services

Wonsuk: there are certainly differences but it is worth keeping in touch with them and seeking their review

Ted: Qing An, can you tell us more about your data structure? ideally json tree structure, if that makes sense for LBS/POI, similar to what we are doing for VSS
... we could potentially reuse that API
... we will have developers using both vehicle and location APIs and would be good to be consistent

Qing: it is hard to make a tree structure for LBS use cases
... currently we define the format according to WebIDL style
... maybe we can discuss more how to try to get more consistent as you suggest
... we are starting to get comments

Wonsuk: can you elaborate why by you went WebIDL approach by email or raise as an issue?

Kaz: when the draft is ready, we should also discuss security and privacy for LBS as well

Qing: we may want to get more people involved for that

Media tuner update

Wonsuk: Ryan can you provide an update?

<inserted> TV Control call minutes

Ryan: I have been working with the TV Control API WG and cross referencing with the use cases we had earlier
... I am looking at the Genivi media manager use cases
... I want to cross reference things over there but not sure we can

Paul: I think so

Ryan: I want to copy over what they have and do a gap analysis
... there are more people working on this in the Genivi side that over here

Paul: Gerald from Bosch was working on this in Genivi and it stopped for awhile. I spoke with him in Paris and said he was ready to reengage
... he is the guy who was leading that and said they were going to pick it back up
... we should try to get a dialogue going with him, this group and Philippe Robin

Ryan: I am finding quite a bit of useful information over there and try to get a rough draft together
... the W3C TV Control API group realizes the number of similarities between their needs and ours, unsure yet if we can align fully

Wonsuk: what are some of the top priority use cases from vehicle side?
... can they cover these or not?
... we need to find out if we can leverage their work or will need to do our own specification

<kaz> TPAC page

[discussion of TPAC and how it would be worth coordinating on media there if we can get appropriate people there]

Kaz: we have a room for Auto WG Monday and Tuesday

<kaz> and Web&TV IG will have their meeting on Monday and TV Control WG will have their meeting on Tuesday

Wonsuk: can you identify the key automotive use cases before TPAC?

Ryan: I can get the work done but skeptical I can get the budget to travel. If not I can attend remotely


Wonsuk: we should start working on agenda for BG F2F at TPAC. LBS and Media of course and wonder if there are other topics
... do we need to discuss SOTA at TPAC?

<kaz> TPAC schedule

Ted: I believe at our Paris F2F that there wasn't interest in web standards around SOTA at this point

Kaz: in addition to TV and GeoLoc we might want to discuss with the Device and Sensors group because they'll have joint discussion with the Geolocation guys
... we might want to join the GeoLoc + Sensor meeting

Wonsuk: that would be good

Kaz: I'll check with the Device group

Wonsuk: should we also try to meet with WebAppSec?

Ted: yes, I'll talk to Sam, their Team contact, and have him look at the work from WG and see if we can get their input

Wonsuk: any other business?


Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.144 (CVS log)
$Date: 2016/08/09 16:29:58 $