W3C Automotive Overview

Ted Guild

Why Web standards for Auto?

Need for a robust application ecosystem
Integration facilitated through common interfaces, avoid vendor lock-in (RFPs)
Reduce fragmentation by competing proprietary approaches
Attract Content Providers - 3rd party apps
Web has proven itself
Connected vehicles relying on Web services
W3C has a long history of providing higher level interfaces to developers

W3C Automotive Activity

Comprised of a Working Group (WG) and Business Group (BG) plus liaisons with other industry or technology focused groups at W3C, Genivi, AGL, AutoISAC, US DOT, AAA, government entities...

Auto WG

Chairs: Paul Boyes (INRIX), Rudolf Streif (JLR)

Formal W3C Standards Process
More rigidly structured (charter)
Presently focused on Vehicle Signals Specifications

Vehicle Specification Evolution at W3C (Initial approach)

Clear up confusion

WebIDL approach started by BG and basis for forming WG in December 2014
would have provided a first class vehicle object in an on-board browser runtime

Vehicle Specification Evolution at W3C (continued)

Pivoted to service approach in July 2016
Based on discussions with Device and Sensors WG, Web of Things WG and W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG)
Web Sockets and [later] HTTP REST
Vehicle signal data model separate from protocol due to rapid innovation, pending signal definitions for things like lidar, cameras, yet to be defined sensors, extensible

Vehicle Information Service Specification

Benefits

no browser extension maintenance
easier to implement and protect
architecture provides additional security layer
similarities with other approaches in industry
Qt, HTML5 or headless in practically any programming language

HTML5 vs Qt (tangent)

I don't care for yet another religious debate, however..

Possibly biased reports, unfair comparisons in produced benchmarks
Hear how various platforms are pleased with their optimized browsers
W3C has Working Groups focused on improving performance
W3C Web Assembly WG - compiled web content
More web developers on the planet that Qt
Guess what the Content Providers are already using?

HTML5 vs Qt (...tangent rambles continued)

Market will be mixed with applications written in both

At least one major Tier One is going pure HTML5

Benefit from all the other standards from W3C with its 450+ Members

Qt benefits directly as well from W3C standards in webkit

Headless applications. use cases: data sampling and sending to the cloud fleet, insurance...

W3C Efficient XML Interchange being used to build some OEM silos

W3C specs compatible with HTML5, Qt and Headless

Auto BG

Chairs: Paul Boyes (INRIX), Wonsuk Lee (ETRI), Qing An (Alibaba)

Acts as an incubator for ideas for possible standardization for connected vehicles
Early prototypes, mock servers and client applications
Has multiple, focused Task Forces
Broader audience than Auto WG
Pre-dated Auto WG
Drafted initial Vehicle Signals specification

Task Forces

Automotive Webplatform Business Group Task Forces

Media Tuner

Can't cruise without tunes

Liaison with Media and Entertainment Activity at W3C
Similar streaming and other needs
Submitted use cases and input to TV Control API WG, encouraging broader scope
Some interest in W3C Second Screen WG for passenger devices
Major needs covered later during VW submission topic

Location Based Services

Coordination with Genivi Navigation
Alibaba contribution
RSI (ViWi) based draft
Seeking further engagement with this industry sector, HERE, TomTom, Garmin, various OEM, etc

Automotive Web Payments

API between merchant, payment providers (in browser or separate apps), and customer
key stakeholders (WG) (IG)
spec mature and shipping in production browsers
Web Commerce Interest Group was looking at what to focus on next
W3C Joint Auto and Payments Task Force proposal
Task force launched 5 October, 2017

Automotive Security & Privacy

Authentication and granular access control considerations built into specification
W3C Automotive Privacy and Security Task Force
Genivi Security Expert Group
Conversations, workshops on forming Research Group at MIT
W3C WebAppSec, WebAuthN WGs, Privacy Interest Group and additional security efforts
Coordination with AutoISAC, US DOT (Volpe), UK DfT, SAE, Irdeto, AAA, security experts from multitude of organizations

RESTful Service Interface

Converging Auto WG VISS specification and VW Group submission

VISS and accompanying VIAS continuing on W3C Recommendation Track as chartered
gain implementation experience with VISS & VIAS from ACCESS, Mitsubishi Elec in Genivi Development Platform and Android, ETRI Samsung and OCF
Prototype code projects, derivative works
Explore specific points of convergence, data model, sockets, http2

VW Group Submission (ViWi)

VW Group microcosm of auto interoperability and continuity issues
VW Audi Porsche ŠKODA Bentley Scania Bugatti Lamborghini
ViWi submission includes additional domains/modules besides signals
- media library and services
- CDN
- mixer
- others potentially later forthcoming
- Invited Expert LBS contribution

Convincing Content Providers

Multitude of competing platforms
App developers not interested in supporting variants of 20 platforms over 15 year
Need for commonality, holding up progress
more than just user apps - can solve data sampling needs for regulators, regional/federal DOT, insurance, OEM cloud silos...

Primary stakeholders

Auto Manufacturers
Tier 1s
Payment processors
Fuel and service companies
Telcos
Insurance Companies
Fleet Management
Solution and Content Providers
State/Province and Municipal Governments

Get Involved!

"Like driving a long stretch of open road alone, standards development work can be a lonely endeavor."
- Genivi's W3C Case Study

infuence standards
align with internal architectures and interests
collaborate with your competition
early adoption == early to market