W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-autowebplatform@w3.org > January 2014

W3C Meeting Notes: 14 JAN 2013

From: Andy Gryc <AGryc@qnx.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 21:32:16 +0000
To: "public-autowebplatform@w3.org" <public-autowebplatform@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CEFC66CC.3FE20%agryc@qnx.com>
Automotive and Web Platform BG call
14 Jan 2014

Attendees
           Andy (chair), Tina, Suresh, Steve, Kaz (scribe), Moriguchi, Kevron, Adam,
           Isobe, Aldric, Urata, sgerken, tripzero, Sakamoto, Phillip
           Murakami, Kotsuka

Agenda
          1. Current state of draft specification
          2. Next face to face meeting

STATE OF THE DRAFT
Our editors Kevron & Justin have put together a first draft for the basic framework, available at
https://raw.github.com/tripzero/automotive-bg/master/vehicle_spec.html . Kevron walked the group through the highlights.

The draft structure does not contain the data or methods yet, but provides: accessor for the root object, ways to invoke the getters/setters, methods to determine optional features, way to expand the API, and an implementation of the zone feature. We’re looking to get consensus on the current content before they continue with the majority of the work, so please provide feedback within the next week.

ACTION (ALL): Feedback on this draft needs to be in by Tuesday January 21 to be considered. Feedback should be emailed to the public w3c auto business group distribution list (public-autowebplatform@w3.org)

Currently, the spec is based on DOMFuture, although it needs to be updated to use current W3C terminology.

Zones had some comments about how to handle for OEM expansion. For example, camera or microphone placement cannot be easily described with simple Front/Middle/Rear/Left/Right attributes. Growth of the existing zone bitmask (especially in a way that allows OEMs to provide non-conflicting extensions) could be problematic as the bitmask is limited to 32 values. Hence, if zones needs to contain some concept of arbitrary placement, it may need to be represented via text strings (or another mechanism). Another solution would be to continue to use zones for the purposes so far contained within the merged four specs, and to add an additional placement attribute for features that aren’t suitable to be described by zones.

In some of the considerations for extension of the zone mechanism, we re-iterated the reasoning behind using WebIDL in the API. Also discussed whether or not this API is applicable to buses, or other non-passenger vehicles.

ACTION (Andy): Update the rational document to ensure it explains why WebIDL is being used, and make sure it’s available in the repository. Also, include assumptions on types of vehicles (passenger, and not transportation or heavy machinery, for example) and when/where the API might apply outside of the vehicle space.

The rational document exists here (although will be housed more permanently in the repository with a link to follow):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform/2013Nov/att-0007/W3C_Vehicle_API_Creation_Guidelines_v3.docx


FACE TO FACE MEETING
Adam/Philipp ran a poll for the dates of the next face to face meeting of the Auto W3C Business Group. Although March 24-25 is the top ranked suggestion, it overlaps with a W3C workshop in Paris. We took the second candidate which had no voiced objections. That date is March 17-18.

ACTION (Adam): Make arrangements to reserve space for F2F, logistics. (Adam, let me know if you need assistance here—Andy)

OTHER TOPICS
Elektrobit mentioned to Aldric during GENIVI meeting that they’d be interested in joining. Anyone is welcome: have them contact Philipp at ph@w3.org<mailto:ph@w3.org>

Raw IRC log content available at http://www.w3.org/2014/01/14-auto-irc
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2014 21:32:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 15 January 2014 21:32:46 UTC