Automotive BG

13 Dec 2016


See also: IRC log


Kaz_Ashimura, Paul_Boyes, Philippe_Robin, Qing_An, Ryan_Davis, Wonsuk_Lee, Ted, Adam_Crofts, Shinjiro_Urata, Rudi_Streif, Tatsuhiko_Hirabayashi
Wonsuk, Paul, Qing_An
kaz, ted


Media tuner

<inserted> scribenick: kaz

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/12/13-tvapi-minutes.html TV Control minutes

ryan: working on media tuner topic
... discussion with the TV Control guys
... really productive
... based on a common ground
... brought use cases from auto
... the way the tuner spec is written is hardware-centric
... not only a tuner but collection of tuner and player would be needed
... "tuner" is confusing from technical viewpoint
... I'm submitting some high-level architecture
... getting out of the concept of "tuner" and use another concept of "player"
... playing/decoding media
... a player may be responsible some media stream
... and another player might be responsible to another resource
... this morning all the TV Control guys agreed

paul: sounds good

kaz: yes

ryan: the original use cases I had on the spreadsheet
... will be rewritten
... the architecture is in question
... they're looking the recorder capability as a different entity
... but a player could be simply connected to a recorder
... the other issue is audio zones
... can be solved by the multiple player approach
... a tuner entity can be actually a player which is tied with tuner
... make sense?

kaz: agree :)

wonsuk: one question
... there was a proposal by VW
... included media tuner capability
... something like spotify
... possible application in vehicle

ryan: current spec doesn't handle that
... currently specific to TV tuner
... rather tied with hardware
... while I myself don't care about hardware
... but concentrate on resources
... have not looked at VW's proposal itself, though

wonsuk: good question

ryan: have worked with several OEMs
... players play media based on user's requests
... haven't work with VW but might be similar

wonsuk: ok
... can we share the VW proposal with the other group participants?
... want to check

ted: I'm working on VW's Member submission
... which will be public
... including car library, media tuner, etc.
... also CDN service
... hoping we'll publish it before the publication moratorium
... will send announcement once it's published

wonsuk: ok
... I'm curious about the Member submission
... standardization based on a submission by a W3C Member?

ted: formal submission by a Member to W3C
... which can be discussed by the BG

wonsuk: ok
... after we have the document from VW, we can share it with other W3C Members. right?

ted: yes
... expected next week

wonsuk: ok. good.
... any comments?

ryan: interested to see that as a Christmas present :)

Redefining the role of the BG

wonsuk: we've discussed this topic before
... at that time, I mentioned we needed to form a TF to revisit use cases
... and we need to try to add more use cases
... like payments use cases
... also lots of different use cases

<paul> https://www.w3.org/community/autowebplatform/wiki/Potential_Work_Areas

kaz: do you confirm that direction?

wonsuk: yes

kaz: as Paul put on IRC, there were several work areas

paul: yes, and there were some more from VW
... how should we handle this?

ted: announcement will be made during the Member submission procedure
... have conversation
... talking with Ian Jacobs about Payments
... possibly we could have discussion on vehicle-specific use cases

paul: traffic API as well?
... HERE is not a W3C Member yet. right?

ted: no
... but recently joined GENIVI

rudi: we're waiting for their input
... maybe we could draft a new charter for backend APIs

paul: the BG is free to explore any use cases

ted: that's correct

kaz: right

<ted> scribenick: ted

kaz: BGs are encouraged to define charter in order to clarify scope to prospects but it does not have to be rigidly defined (unlike WG)

<scribe> scribenick: kaz

paul: ADAS use cases?

rudi: part of the discussion within GENIVI
... GENIVI is collaborating with OCF

philippe: concerning HERE, not sure about their intention yet
... their work is very important for the LBS topic
... we'll likely have a meeting in January

<ted> scribenick: ted

kaz: I was wondering how to handle Geolocation mapping and traffic data in context of LBS topic
... it should probably be in a single task force
... later it might make sense to create a separate one

<scribe> scribenick: kaz

wonsuk: also thinking about that
... open APIs on the cloud side for traffic data

paul: could be interested
... what about mapbox? are they a W3C Member?
... monitoring and checking the stuff
... connected with PSA guys?

ted: they're interested in REST APIs but still need some more time

(discussion on infographic about vehicle industry stakeholders)

<ted> http://pass-projekt.de/

<ted> [agree it would be helpful to have a map of different standards bodies involved in auto and their areas. we keep learning of new/duplicate efforts]

<paul> http://23je8jawagt19m8da2cje4yb.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Ecosystem-Infographic.png

<ted> [OMA is trying to have an authorative document along those lines]

<ted> https://wiki.openmobilealliance.org/display/OI/OMA+Report+on+Automotive+Opportunity

<paul> lochbridge infographic connected car

<paul> http://lochbridge.com/blog/next-big-automotive-revolution/

paul: Lochbridge's whitepaper

wonsuk: interesting item to me
... what about cloud APIs like Amazon?
... we can also sync with existing cloud APIs
... there are companies provide APIs for smart home
... we can think about how to integrate existing APIs like smart homes and speech APIs

rudi: interesting to me too
... OCF is working on that kind of APIs
... automotive profile is one of their defining profiles

paul: there is a WoT group within W3C as well

rudi: we can integrate capabilities

paul: HERE has mechanism to integrate location data
... interesting to research quickly
... btw, is anybody could join the call for security?

ted: security call on Thursday

rudi: they're modeling security portion
... vehicle signal server to get connected
... lot of good momentum

kaz: info on the WoT IG
... they'are launching a WG shortly
... also have restarted the discussion on security and privacy from the viewpoint of WoT
... and would like to invite experts from related groups including the Automotive group
... Hashimoto-san should be a good starting point for the collaborators

paul: what about OCF liaison?

kaz: WoT group is forming liaison with OCF as well

paul: good
... Hashimoto-san's joining the WoT security discussion would be great
... there are different domains

kaz: also my second point is that some of the vehicle capability could/should be handled by a bit more abstract layer like WoT rather than the Vehicle Signal Server

paul: yeah

Test environment

paul: btw, wondering about the test environment
... Urata-san mentioned he was working on the Web Platform Testing environment

kaz: yes
... as you know, there is the Web Platform Testing infrastructure
... but the framework is developed mainly for pc/mobile Web browsers
... we should be able to use the framework for part of the Vehicle Signal Spec features since the framework includes WebSocket capability (for pc/mobile browsers) as well
... however, we need to add modules to get vehicle data on the Vehicle Signal Server side and send the data to the Vehicle Signal Client side

Kaz's note on the resources from the Web Platform Tests Project:
- Web Platform Tests Project
- Test Suite for Web Platform Testing infrastracture
- Web Platform Test Runner site

paul: ok
... this topic itself is not really the topic for the BG but I'll put it together
... anything else for today?

wonsuk: anything else?


[ adjourned ]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.148 (CVS log)
$Date: 2016/12/13 20:00:03 $