<scribe> scribenick: kaz
<inserted> issue-2
zk: several issues on
github
... not enough input yet
... we've not talked about applications
kn: we have 2 options
... flashing or downloading
... downloading applications from somewhere
... don't have conclusion yet
... part of the scripting or might be part of the TD
... we need to think about those options
zk: had some talk with security
experts within Intel
... both are possible solutions
... but not sure about the need of industry guys
... we need to include security/architecture discussions
kn: right
... e.g., WoT device might need only flashing mechanism
zk: downloadable application vs
flashing model
... you have to replace every certification, etc.
... not sure which would be good for the industry
... would support downloadable application model, though
... if every manufacture implements applications themselves we
don't need to care about them
kn: maybe we don't have to define the first part
zk: we don't have to make decision now
kn: some kind of central
management would be needed
... some control capability
zk: that would be also part of
the deliverable
... we need to formulate the use cases for better
understanding
kn: ok
... that's your point on the github issue
zk: still need to understand the rationale.md document more
kn: managing the servient
zk: who is approving replacement of scripts?
kn: we need some more use cases
for that
... have not talked about security yet
zk: we need to define use cases
exactly
... detailed use case scenario is needed
... we need to expand the use cases to explain the
rationale
kn: token for access control, etc.
ka: automotive WG's vehicle signal server spec has security consideration using tokens
ka: that might be a good lead for our security consideration as well
zk: the description is kind of vague
ka: we might want to have some more detailed use case description for our purposes
zk: concrete use case description is very important here
ka: +1
zk: who can update the
application script, etc.
... everyone needs to understand scenario
kn: do we want to join the security tf call?
zk: you need to provide input in written format
ka: right
... descriptions from our viewpoints
kn: ok
... that's why I think we need the rationale document :)
... have just converted the md file to HTML
HTML version of the rational document
kn: the above HTML version of the rationale document is linked from the scripting index.html
zk: index.html is the main
Scripting spec
... it's OK by me for you to use HTML (rationale.html)
kn: prefer HTML to handle figures
easily but md file is easy to edit
... so maybe I'll maintain both the md and HTML
... figures won't be resized within md files
zk: can send some hints to you by email
zk: have made a pull request as well
zk: that is already merged
... can add clarification on how to handle events as well
kn: generating open data, etc.?
zk: which use case?
kn: that is not part of any use cases so far
zk: please add a use case in that case
ka: +1
zk: you can make comments to the issue 6 as well
zk: any other open issues for
today?
... we need to work on Issue 6 and 2
zk: we'll have Johannes next
week
... note the time change in Europe
ka: yes, one hour later than today in Europe next week