Meeting minutes
Daniel summarizes last week, continued overview of VSSo and open issues in github from Bosch
Daniel: currently adapting the tooling and will make it available tomorrow
.static attributes and classes, suggestion we should avoid supernodes like vehicle
.we started to discuss mapping to DTDL
.understand from MS, a commitment should be possible with next semester at midyear but no clear idea of what that could entain
.perhaps you can let us know what to expect and suggestions on what to work on in the meantime
Mike: Christian and Bryan suppose to be here?
Jeff: Christian yes and maybe Peter
.you're thinking on next steps?
Daniel: yes, exactly. goal is alignment between VSSo and DTDL, heard you tried it out but want to build up on direction with VSSo and what we should be working on until your semester starts
.how to learn from your requirements, structure and so forth
Jeff: Christian has our main things in his presentation that are holding us back
.when it comes to doing the conversion, he is ok with coding up whatever necessary with existing OWL based tooling
.it is really the relationships
.we would prefer to only convert VSSo and not VSS. Mike and Ash may need VSS converted
Mike: we were going to start with VSS actually
Jeff: that your understanding, VSS in the car and VSSo in the cloud
Daniel: that is one use case, there may be uses for VSSo in the vehicle, for rules based reasoning
Jeff: I see
Mike: our work starts midyear but we want to do some preliminary work. long term we may also provide VSSo in vehicle if it makes sense
Ash: probably easier to just go with VSSo since supporting conversion with OWL is more straightforward
.Christian could speak to that better
Daniel: that was my conclusion from last week as well
.path is clearer
Ash: what is GENIVI's position with VSS vs VSSo?
Daniel: VSS is the core truth and we will maintain via tooling generated derivatives
.rules will be clear on the mapping
Ash: we need to look at what our customers want but VSSo is closer to our setup
Daniel: I don't think you block anything from choosing one to the other but that said we would benefit from rationale on your choice so we can support other domains
.that perspective will be important
DanielA: since VSS is the foundation and well maintained a pain point will be the tooling
Jeff: regarding relationships, we are finding we are having to make up things
.are you going to provide more we can use?
Daniel: yes, exactly
Jeff: and how we going to solve left/right mirror issue Christian pointed out?
Daniel: instatiated instances can be related or object property of concept
Jeff: as we get those pieces worked out it will go more smoothly
.as I remember those were the big problems
.Christian let me know he is in another meeting today
.our next steps are to look at new tooling for OWL generated VSSo coming soon from you?
Daniel: I'll provide turtle (ttl) file for him to look at so we have some content to discuss in two weeks
DanielA: we need to decide what concepts to map from VSS since you can tell more than one thing. if the mapping is well defined we have a better starting point for what can come on top
.focus of feedback should be on the core ontology
Daniel: even if you have the concepts already mapped, the rest should come automatically
Jeff: we are not going to provide much information on what properties are to be defined but can give feedback on the structure, comparing to other industries
.that will be the real value of what Christian does
.he is doing it with manufacturing and others, has a good understanding of how these things can fit together
Daniel: anything else for today or should we keep the call short for today as we know what we need for our next meeting?
Jeff: good for me
.Daniel, can you send out an email to us about your OWL tooling so I can share with Christian?
Daniel: sure
.anything else from workshop or?
DanielA: regarding extension to core model, is it meant to be included the sensor structure?
Daniel: to be determined
[adjourned]
RPC
Gunnar reports discussions progressing with AutoSAR, how it may be pertinent to services in addition to signals
Gunnar: we have Franca to AutoSAR translation including methods and properties
.binding to Some/IP stack
Ted summarizes to Jon activity in this task force
Gunnar: eSync interested in exposing SOTA in a VSC format
Rudi: Magnus has been in more contact with the stakeholders at Woven and in Toyota, I can't give any status update yet interest in catching up
Ted: any updates from AMM session on VSC? attendees we can try to draw in further?
Gunnar: decent attendance, sessions recorded for people to be able to catch up at their convenience. we will be sending out a survey to see what areas are of interest
Gunnar: is there anything you can share from Volvo side?
Jon: we remain interested, will want to use protobuf and gRPC
Gunnar: we understand how much you're doing in-house but there will be need to have open standards to be able to engage partners more
Jon: we're on board
Ted: similar to CCC's digital key, suspect there are a number of services in Android Automotive that may be worth representing in service catalog. seems Google focusing more on UX, less on other needs in their curation of VHAL signals. curious if there are services Volvo would like to see that aren't part of AA etc
Gunnar: re signals for Android, we're trying to engage Volvo in defining that mapping
Jon: I don't have the right information but that is a valid question