See also: IRC log
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
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?
[adjourned]