Automotive Working Group Teleconference

Ted: we want to move VISS CR. all of the open issues are addressed, Rudi or Paul need to send a call for consensus
... I will take a snapshot and ensure it pass validators (markup, css, links) and pubrule checker

Adam: sounds great, thanks Ted

Magnus: what is the timeline?

Ted explains process and timing for next stages, hope to have VISS to REC by end of Q1 or early Q2

Ted: we have charter extension through March but will also include VISS in recharter along with v2 RSI

VISS to CR

recharter WG

VIAS

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-automotive/2018Jan/0010.html

Ted: last week we consumed most of the call on VIAS and I was asked by Hira to write a more detailed explanation which I did and sent last week

Hira: thank you for the explanation and understand it is early to advance VIAS to CR
... a higher level spec would be useful still and would like to keep VIAS on standards track

Urata: at last TPAC there was encouragement to publish VIAS as a Note because of JS library
... if we publish as a Note it would be specification for a JS library
... in the email exchanges, some members were not fully understanding and supporting the strategy to push to a Note
... not all WG members are supporting that
... I would like to discuss further about moving to a Note or CR
... if it is because it is a JS library that is not a good enough reason

Ted: that is just one reason, enough to stop VIAS going to CR. more substantively the TAG and Director do not support this spec moving forward and are encouraging it to be published as a Note and an open source library to be opened

Urata: it does not explicitly say it is a JS library but an JS API

Ted: it was called a JS library at the F2F when VIAS first came up. if not a library then we need multiple browser implementations, we are circling the conversation

Patrick: can we summarize the main issue?

<PatrickB> Sorry, I can only join via IRC today

Patrick: this interface description was meant to interact with VISS

Urata: in the document VIAS does not have to interface with VISS and it does not care what the underlying implementation is

Patrick: at TPAC we described it as a library but if we describe it as an interface for describing vehicles. what is the value for W3C to standardize this

Urata: it is an easy way to access the data of the vehicle, similar to the Geolocation API

Patrick: I have been listening to this discussion and trying to understand it
... why is VIAS of such importance? what does it provide that VISS does, yes a library is helpful and the interface has value
... what would be helpful would be to substantiate what it provides
... if everyone has that understand, I do not need the explanation
... my understanding was VISS was needed and more important than this interface

Urata: I don't understand why VIAS goes to Note
... if it is just about JS library than that is a misunderstanding

Patrick: does the rest of the W3C understand it is about the interface and not the JS library

Urata: in last year's mail thread about VIAS I found some other people who don't fully understand
... why to go to a Note instead of CR

<hira> Features of VIAS is noted: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-automotive/2017Nov/0029.html

Ted: VIAS at the start was suppose to be a wrapper to sit on top of VISS, that is clearly Rudi's understanding in his blog post and in email - referring to VIAS as a client implementation of VISS
... having it sit on top of any arbitrary protocol including HTTP which we were suppose to define but have not in v1 (VISS), will in v2 (RSI)

Patrick: what is the essential issue?

Ted: take for example Andrew's comments on behalf of the TAG, this is preliminary and too immature for standardization. others have expressed this similarly, if you try to design a library by committee you are bound to get it wrong. best is to write the code, handle feature requests and bug reports

Hira: W3C Management is confused about a wrapper specification versus higher level API
... higher level API should be kept as a standardization track

Patrick: are we in agreement that the implementation is worth a Note by the W3C so other people can use it but not a CR?

Ted: yes other people can use a Note

Patrick: we can say "hey we came up with this, please try it out but will not make it an official release (REC)"
... is that something people can agree with

<PatrickLue> VIAS: implemented library (proof on concept, reference implementation) AND high level API

Guru: it demonstrates VISS could be implemented

Ted: Rudi has expressed value as a client implementation

recharter WG

Ted: I wanted to resolve this discussion on VIAS before working on the charter. Since TAG and Director do not support it going forward I would have difficulty trying to bring a charter with it forward
... I am also in discussion with chair candidates, ensuring existing chairs want to continue and trying to enlist new one[s]

Business Group focus

Ted: part of rechartering on VISS completion and taking up RSI will include some/all of the various modules/domains like media, navigation, mixer etc
... they will graduate from the BG incubator and we should define what work to be taken up

<scribe> … new candidate RSI modules including potentially one on passenger+driver profiles from a new organization joining the BG

(I have support from management to word our new charter so new RSI modules can graduate from BG to formal WG standardization without rechartering every time)

Ted: the Automotive Web Payments joint task force is under the Auto BG
... there is also various efforts for collecting data from vehicles, bringing it into the cloud and being able to share it

Data Silos

Ted: we had a brief tour on a past group call of ISO20078 from Daimler, separate meeting on Sensoris from HERE and I am talking to US DOT, Geotab and other fleet managers on Neutral Vehicle
... we will have a presentation on Neutral Vehicle, inviting ISO and HERE audiences as well, on our 6 February call
... I also learned Ford announced similar ambition at CES
... these efforts should be encouraged to use our data model and our standards (VISS and RSI) for collecting data to send to the cloud

(some OEM silos are being built using another W3C standard already, EXI - Efficient XML Interchange which can do both XML and JSON. it makes data transmission more efficient and would save on bandwidth)

Web Payments reminder

Ted: reminder the Auto Web Payments task force is meeting on Thursday at 15GMT
... we have some interested participants from our group, including payments engineers from JLR and Audi
... I have been meeting with electric vehicle charging organizations and hope to attract more participants from them
... this effort is still ramping up, please encourage participation from your organizations