W3C

Automotive Working Group Face to Face

09 Sep 2019

Attendees

Present
Magnus, Adnan, Joakim, Harjot, Glenn, Ulf, Peter, Christian_Umbach-Xapix, Ted
Regrets
Chair
Peter, Adnan
Scribe
Ted

Contents


Intros

Backgrounds

Christian: started with interest from Daimler to share data with customers and their communication interfaces
... worked with [redacted] on APIs. we have been part of a European initiative on data streams from a SmartCities' perspective
... worked with a number of other OEMs and Tier1s and a recurring theme is everyone is on slightly different technologies
... some are REST, some streams, some Graph...
... we focus on integration and normalization pain point
... we have proposed some research work to the German government about building open source adapters to different vehicle APIs
... also around data governance for off-vehicle use, from a GDPR perspective but also CA, NV
... we were a founding member of mobi blockchain and still scratching the service

Joakim: is it related to gitbot? you are combining open source data

Christian: it is a data orchestration layer

W3C Auto overview slides

Glenn: we do quite a few intergrations at Geotab

Christian: we have been in touch with some of your European colleagues

Magnus: your platform on or off the vehicle?

Christian: off

Magnus: sounds like a brokered solution, to normalize from multiple OEMs?

Christian: internal broker, we work with Otonomo for instance
... we do not hold data on our end. the integration components can exist elsewhere

Glenn: you mentioned SmartCity interest, you doing any integration there yet?

Christian: FourSq, Yelp apis, entertainment services and fuel provider apis

Joakim: you mentioned an EU project?

Christian: fiware
... #1 pain point they are trying to address is the cost of each city solving their own solution, desire to have a standard
... it is a rather young initiative 4-5 years, start of adoption

Ted summarizes activity, current liaison efforts etc@@

Christian: do you see AutoSAR focus being extended to cloud?

Ted: we want the same data definitions at IVI/TSU level, in cloud and down closer to signal inception at the ECU. That way your VISS or Gen2 implementation can simply aggregate and proxy signals to requests.

Joakim: can you describe your GraphQL uses?

Christian: somewhat, it does a great job to expose complex expansive data stores

Joakim: someone tried an indexing experiment recently Neo4j

Adnan: it can be heavy on the client side

Ted: we're JSON, streams and REST vehicle side but could see how Graph queries on local caches of data originating off vehicle would be useful as well for AI for instance
... There is a new Business Group forming out of the Graph workshop by the way

Christian: if you look across the different OEMs some are close to realtime data streaming

[discussion on anonymization]

Glenn: maybe Harjot will elaborate about how we anonymize

Harjot: we make certain data sets available after it is aggregated and anonymized such as weather and pothole detection
... we will take 3 or more fleets worth of vehicle to feed into that

Christian: what is a large enough a fleet to provide your anonymization?

Glenn: we are socializing that at present

[more discussion on GPPR/CCPA]

Harjot: we have blackout periods as well, when employees are off the clock

[more on nuances of privacy and hinderance to making use of this data]

Glenn: one argument is the greater good, increasing road safety

Joakim: There will clearly be instances where regulators will require information and want to see it used for the public interest

Magnus: there is some pending EU legislation along those lines

Peter: I know of an OEM who was sued by government for not providing that information

Christian: cities are requiring data for example in providing permits to the shared scooter providers

<magnus> ecall legislation is already in effect since late 2018

<magnus> in eu...

Agenda review

Glenn: I want to see handling legacy vehicles as well

https://www.w3.org/auto/wg/wiki/Auto-f2f-sept-2019

Liaisons update and strategy

ISO TC 22 - Extended Vehicle / Neutral Server - liaison request voted on and accepted

ISO TC 204 - Intelligent Transportation Systems - liaison request made, met with their secretariat, will attend their plenary/f2f in Singapore next month where they will vote. also some of the workshop attendees are involved in ITS

AutoSAR - discusssed with GENIVI who is on their advisory board, no update

TC22 - Caruso, Otonomo... Nevada

<Harjot> Nevada link: https://www.vda.de/en/topics/innovation-and-technology/data-security/what-is.html

@@r2r obd2 silos or miscommunication agree all on same model makes sense

Ted: what I need is help from those here is to look internally within their organization for who is involved in these other standards efforts. They can help us with understanding the group dynamic and how best to make a successful proposal.

Adnan, Peter and others agree to reach out internally within their companies

[discussion around ts 21185 - secure vehicle interface]

Ted: willing to be liason for two sides to this issue. The auto distro could help flush out opinions/thoughts regarding topic.
...I should probably go over my call notes from Mark Zachos DGtech about what groups we may want to try to coordinate with in SAE
...kind of a pain not having liaison worked out with SAE, tried anew recently with favorable responses but not optimistic yet about resolution

Glenn: J3138 not to interfere with vehicle systems while in use, probably a good starting point
... J3005 telematics and J3005-2 security for telematics

<Harjot> J3138 non-instrusive & instrusive commands defns: https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3138_201806/

Glenn: Lisa Boran at Ford is a good person to talk with

Ted: Tom Forrest, Mark Zachos and Ira Mcdonald too, figure out which activities would make sense to try to align

<js> There is a record of the liaison at: https://www.iso.org/organization/10143.html

Ted: SAE more a North America and parts of Asia thing, what is the equiv in EU, VDA?

Adnan: yeah probably, I can look into it more

Christian: there is also Mobi blockchain with Renault, VW, BMW...
... Chris Balenger former Toyota is heading that

Ted: need to get more involved with VDA as well [particulars on individuals to reach out to]

Adnan: also Sensoris coordination
... we've been meeting with them in Munich, agree to some data mapping

Ted: we agreed tentatively to same with Prokop re Sensoris in 2018

Glenn: VDA specs are more prescriptive from my experience

Ted: apart from GENIVI, what is a good way into AutoSAR?

Adnan: not sure, I can ask around

Glenn: ACEA is more involved in TC22 than Nevada is my impression

Industry Trends

Android widening based on recent news wrt GM

[discussion of GENIVI Android group, summary of past discussions wrt VISS]

Peter: essentially the same for us in 2021

Ulf: Volvo like the other OEMs started building out their own IVI. there were some working on porting Android to our hardware
... it was much better from far fewer engineers, hence the shift in my opinion

Peter: yeah but a much longer story

Adnan: why not just take Android open source and build on top?

Ulf: not sure

Peter: GENIVI was moving too slowly

Ted: personally I liked the banded approach of AGL/GENIVI for long run
... GENIVI model catered to corporate mentality at the time, AGL more open source mindset
... see OEMs falling for the long game of the tech giants...

Joakim: there is no way some of the OEM can come up with the AI capabilities

@@what does this mean for us? daniel, paul, peter, genivi on android relevance

Ted: I still see us useful in the TSU and various devices that may be allowed to communicate with it

Peter: their vehicle api isn't sufficient and don't see it advancing quick enough

Ulf: I think what we are doing is a compliment to Android which I think has a strong future going forward
... there are many external parties interested in this data that don't want to do so in Android, I see two pipes

Adnan: you will need two interfaces, on and off-board

Ulf: yes but I see two on-board pipes

Ted: GENIVI has an Android initiative, figuring out the gaps and what is needed. I attended their workshop at GENIVI AMM in May in Munich but haven't been attending the calls, should see if we can get a summary from Gunnar

Joakim: we should have clear use cases for which make sense

Peter: we have been having the same circular discussion

ViWi data

Adnan's diagrams

Adnan previews his and Daniel's assessment of ViWi data representation vs VSS

graph data

vss
							   diagram

Adnan: if we can extend ViWi it could be quite good

Ulf: I think they need backwards compatibility

Adnan: we could provide mapping for their current depth structure

ViWi without depth limitation to better support tree models, backwards support could be ViWi service providing previous uris in parallel

Peter: I think given move towards Android it would be difficult to convince Volvo to go towards ViWi

Ulf: Volvo has shown they can use VISS and Android

Ted: I wonder if some would only want to support subscriptions and sockets. Volvo isn't exposing VISS to Android though, right?

Ulf: ViWi is a piece in AGL's IVI stack

Ted: AGL says they do open source code, not standards. maybe overstating...

Peter: their design was to support broader range of cars
... no wrt VISS to Android
... but possible

Adnan: I know a guy going over to GM from Google

Ted: Peter, can you introduce us?

Peter: yeah but not sure how that would go yet
... depends on who
... they have competing teams internally
... they only have a small number of signals at present

https://source.android.com/devices/automotive/properties.html

Adnan: you would have to extend that to be useful

Wiki of options for how to proceed concerning VSS in ViWi

Ulf: rbranch could help represent ViWi data in VSS

Ted: that might help their forward migration

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]

    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
    $Date: 2019/10/29 17:56:35 $