Re: [auto-wg] minutes - 20 December 2016

Thank you, Kaz. I appreciate it.

Rudi

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org> wrote:

> available at:
>   https://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-auto-minutes.html
>
> also as text below.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kazuyuki
>
> ---
>    [1]W3C
>
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
>
>                                - DRAFT -
>
>                              Automotive WG
>
> 20 Dec 2016
>
>    See also: [2]IRC log
>
>       [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-auto-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>           Kaz, Kevin, Mike, Patric_B, Patrick_L, Paul, Peter,
>           Rudi, Song, Urata, Ted
>
>    Regrets
>    Chair
>           Rudi, Paul, Peter
>
>    Scribe
>           kaz
>
> Contents
>
>      * [3]Topics
>          1. [4]Testing
>          2. [5]Issues
>          3. [6]Meeting during CES
>      * [7]Summary of Action Items
>      * [8]Summary of Resolutions
>      __________________________________________________________
>
> Testing
>
>    urata: would like to start with the testing topic
>    ... mentioned some concern within my message
>    ... attached an attachment file
>    ... to describe how to handle external resources
>    ... may be going to break the W3C testing policy
>
>    ->
>    [9]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-automotive/2016D
>    ec/0035.html Urata-san's message (member-only)
>
>       [9] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-automotive/
> 2016Dec/0035.html
>
>    urata: the concern is clear
>    ... if it's OK to refer to external resources, there would be
>    no problem
>
>    kaz: personally think there should not be problem if all the
>    resources are accessible online
>    ... can check with PLH
>
>    peter: the definition of "testing" is testing specs
>    ... not the server resources themselves
>
>    paul: right
>    ... don't see how to test our tests without external resources
>    like VSS
>
>    kaz: will talk with PLH and clarify the requirements for
>    testing
>
>    paul: ok
>    ... anyway Urata-san has started great work on testing
>
>    <urata_access> Regarding the test assertion document, it is
>    being created at Hirabayashi-san's site.
>
> Issues
>
>    rudi: shows issues on his screen
>
>    -> [10]https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/107 Issue-107
>
>      [10] https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/107
>
>    rudi: discrepancy between the document title and the shortname
>    ... would propose we rename the title to "Vehicle Information
>    Service Specification"
>
>    kevin: change the title from "Vehicle Signal Server Spec"?
>
>    kaz: either is ok
>    ... it depends on our preference as the whole WG
>
>    <ted> [vehicle-information-service shortname is what came out
>    of mail thread. i believe we can change the shortname and title
>    if desired]
>
>    kaz: so the resolution from this call is changing the document
>    title to "Vehicle Information Service Specification"
>    ... and use that title for the 2nd WD
>    ... right?
>
>    rudi: yes
>
>    urata: so you're suggesting we change the document title?
>    ... is it OK to change the title of the document?
>    ... we should ask all the group participants about their
>    opinions as well
>    ... from my viewpoint, I've been already using the name of
>    "Vehicle Signal Server Specification" in many places within my
>    codes
>    ... on the other hand, the acronym for "Vehicle Signal Server
>    Spec" is kind of confusing since it's VSSS and similar to VSS
>
>    peter: would agree with Rudi's argument
>
>    urata: can change the name myself
>    ... but we should ask others' opinions as well
>
>    rudi: yes
>    ... this issue-107 itself is one of the feedbacks for the FPWD
>
>    urata: ok
>
>    kaz: in that case, the client-side spec's name would be also
>    "Vehicle Information Client Specification". right?
>
>    paul: "Vehicle Information API" would still make sense
>
>    kaz: ok
>    ... we don't have to decide the client spec's name now
>    ... but at some point, we need to think about that
>
>    rudi: ok
>
>    paul: that (=using "Vehicle Information API") is my opinion
>
>    kaz: ok
>    ... we should set some deadline to get feedback for this
>    proposal
>
>    rudi: would like to publish the 2nd draft with the updated name
>    next year
>
>    -> [11]https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/99 Issue-99
>
>      [11] https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/99
>
>    rudi: JSON Schema instead of WebIDL
>
>    kevin: agreeable
>
>    patrick: have good experience on JSON Schema
>    ... all the media is defined using JSON Schema within VW
>    ... could express the data model easier using JSON Schema than
>    WebIDL
>
>    kevin: offer to add JSON Schema notation as well as WebIDL in
>    January
>
>    <rstreif> Per Working Group Meeting: consent to accompany the
>    specification with the JSON schema metadata for the API
>    specification; @drkevg and @acrofts84 to add JSON schema and
>    WebIDL definitions in 1/2017
>
>    -> [12]https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/91 Issue-91
>
>      [12] https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/91
>
>    rudi: whole issue list for the server spec
>    ... generated by Adam
>    ... would be great if Adam and Kevin could go through the list
>
>    <rstreif> #91: Per Working Group Meeting: @drkevg, @acrofts84,
>    and the editors and chairs review the list and clear the
>    remaining items.
>
>    kaz: btw, we should change the text for the issue label
>    "Vehicle Signal Server Spec" to "Vehicle Information Service
>    Spec", shouldn't we?
>
>    rudi: right
>
>    -> [13]https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/87 Issue-87
>
>      [13] https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/87
>
>    rudi: Deliverable definition
>
>    <rstreif> #87: Per Working Group Meeting: addressed at this
>    point with the new charter. Close.
>
>    -> [14]https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/85 Issue-85
>
>      [14] https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/85
>
>    #85: Per Working Group Meeting: ticket stands; Vehicle
>    Information API Specification yet to be created;
>
> Meeting during CES
>
>    paul: what would people discuss at CES?
>    ... WG? BG?
>
>    rudi: let's meet in Thursday afternoon
>    ... 3-5pm
>    ... myself can't attend CES but Magnus will be there
>
>    [ adjourned ]
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> Summary of Resolutions
>
>    [End of minutes]
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [15]scribe.perl version
>     1.148 ([16]CVS log)
>     $Date: 2016/12/20 18:15:56 $
>
>      [15] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>      [16] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>


-- 
*Rudolf J Streif*
System Architect - Open Source Initiative
Open Source Technology Centre

*M:* +1.619.631.5383
*Email:*  rstreif@jaguarlandrover.com



UK: G/26/2 G02 Building 523, Engineering Centre, Gaydon, Warwick, CV35 ORR
US: 1419 NW 14th Ave, Portland, OR 97209
jaguar.com | landrover.com
-------------------
Business Details:
Jaguar Land Rover Limited
Registered Office: Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF
Registered in England No: 1672070

This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential information for a
specific individual and purpose.  The information is private and privileged
and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, please e-mail us immediately.  We
apologise for any inconvenience caused but you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying or distribution or the taking of any action in reliance
on the information contained herein is strictly prohibited.

This e-mail does not constitute an order for goods or services unless
accompanied by an official purchase order.