<scribe> Meeting: In-Vehicle Best Practices
<scribe> scribenick: ted
https://www.w3.org/community/autowebplatform/wiki/Best_Practices#Constraint_Areas
Ted reviews constraints
Glenn: our aftermarket devices
also serve as a hub for additional equipment such as cameras,
different tmps...
... additional sensors
... there should be some physical or wireless interface for
aftermarket inclusions
... including potentially IoT devices within the vehicle
... it would be great to map that data back into VSS/VISS
Ted: it is possible, using
private branches or if some cases layering...
... for aftermarket tpms, layer might make sense for additional
data at same node
Glenn: yes and things like dashcams, smartphones or IoT devices. they would benefit from a hub
Gunnar: if it is not using CAN
but eg BT, you will want to align somehow with the appropriate
VSS node
... depending on how deep you want access within the vehicle,
expect pushback from OEM
Glenn: from your description the device would operate as client
Gunnar: we are only seeing limited 3rd party apps at IVI/Android level, seldom elsewhere
@@BT attack surface, hesitation on CAN... how to interject?
Ted: we know some are opening up eg RPC IoT
Peter: there are some
experimentations but not sure there is a clear plan on how to
offer these?
... various internal discussions
Arman: we have several
conflicting environments in this conversation
... vehicle may change after it leaves the factory. it might be
a good idea to allow for streams of additional input/data
sources
... some from vehicle manufacturers that are signed, there may
be consumer off-the-shelf devices and how do we trust
them?
... we should differentiate between our use cases. I want to
contribute to validity of information section, elaborate on
mechanisms that could help provide more insight on how
trustable that information is
... not all information should be trusted the same
[identifying source would be key]
Joakim: on topic of IoT, not my area but have seen automotive examples using W3C WoT. is that what we're talking
[adjourned]
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/@tpms/for aftermarket tpms, layer might make sense for additional data at same node/ Present: Ted Ashish Glenn Marty Arman Isaac Gunnar Peter Joakim Found ScribeNick: ted Inferring Scribes: ted WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]