- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 03:34:59 +0900
- To: public-automotive <public-automotive@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9XNFrcRz69cse4dY=A-axj3Ngf7yiAD46UNVrguHNHWFQ@mail.gmail.com>
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/
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2016 18:36:23 UTC