<scribe> scribenick: ted
<scribe> Scribe: Ted
Peter: Ulf wanted to give us his impression on what is missing in VISS v2
Ulf: we didn't get time to
discuss last week so doing now instead
... Gen2 is quite complete functionality wise, needs some
polishing and possibly mild rewrites of some chapters
... that said there are a few things I want to bring up
... I would like to see Gen2 have historic data, previously
captured
... use case I could see is for when vehicle looses
coverage/connectivity
... this can be done with our existing set of queries. you
would use $history and provide a period of time desired
... using ISO8601 for time period
... if Gen2 instance doesn't support it sends the latest
value
... this doesn't require activation within the car, client
request recording of data
... vehicle should be able to detect it lost connection from
client and can send data in the meantime, optimize for amount
of data cached
Peter: what is being stored? latest subscription?
Ulf: no, vehicle would detect
lost client connection and will retain data collection
... sampling frequency choice of the vehicle
Ted: Gen2 could recognize client
didn't close properly and collect data based on existing
subscriptions, persistent subscription
... wonder about vehicle having historic data collection
desired
Ulf: we shouldn't speculate on what it might store
Ted: otherwise you have no guarantee the data you want will be something the Gen2 implementation chooses to collect historic for
Peter: does this handle legal permissions?
Ulf: if implementation doesn't
support or request violates a policy, doesn't have to return
the data
... this would be an optional feature
Gunnar: I see Ted's suggestion as
independent
... if you are saying we will not write it is required to store
historical signals
Ulf: implementation will decide whether to send current data or historic
Gunnar: if the persistent feature
is implemented that can influence historic data
availablility
... I am still in the camp that we should go further with data
collection jobs
... if we have any record features, historic can be available.
not fan of syntax but let's work on the idea
Ulf: I interpret this as some
interest
... I'll start with an issue to further the discussion
... next idea is multiple data parts from different parts of
the tree
... a client often doesn't want one data point but multiple
scattered across the tree. we already have subtree
capabilities
... if they are in different places you might want them closer
for convenience. I would like to retrieve in one request
... we can do this by augmenting the path expression with a
query
Adnan: if I understand correctly, you want to combine in a single request?
Ulf: yes
Adnan: it might be easier as payload of request instead of complex parameterized querystring in URI
Ulf: that would be more POST than
GET
... this would be candidate for discussion as an issue
Ted: we can also look at existing query schemes such as xpath/xquery
Ulf: next is signal discovery,
syntax with $spec=0 being undefined levels
... instead of using query component of URL's query syntax (RFC
3986), we may want to use fragment syntax
... use #reservedword
... I'll create another issue
... we already discussed last topic from my slides
Peter: what are the major takeaways from last week?
Ted: working on draft charter
Ted summarizes steps
Peter: I wanted to see if there
was more input on that
... it is a difficult but necessary task
Peter: wanted to hear others' thoughts
Ted: a breakout call with
interested parties like we do RPC
... I know Arman and Isaac are interested, want to hear others'
thoughts
Arman: should include the links I mentioned last week and sent you
Ted: will add those to last day's minutes
https://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/introduction.html
https://e-estonia.com/solutions/security-and-safety
Glenn: the public data set for
testing interop for OBD2 may be worth testing against
... there is issue of bad actors utilizing that existing data
port. tools we develop can control data access and prevent
inappropriate use of
... OBD wireless activities are being discussed in EU and NA
but what we are doing is most practical and we want to test is
across multiple vehicles
... EV are not required like ICE vehicles to have that port