W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-automotive@w3.org > February 2016

Re: [auto-wg] minutes - 2 February 2016

From: Shinjiro Urata <shinjiro.urata@access-company.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 20:25:06 +0900
Message-ID: <CANXs=p5X4YWXKm+DQwGLpSLe4Q6uN6peUi4ZpCN1Yw2jCa7f3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-automotive <public-automotive@w3.org>
Cc: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Dear all,

As written in the minutes

==>>
   hira: can I go back to the API discussion?
   ... had some discussion on Issue 72 last week
   ... didn't see big advantage with the new proposal
   ... so would clarify Pros/Cons of the current API and the new
   proposal
   ....
   ....

   urata: agree with Hira-san, and would clarify the discussion
   points
   ... because there are multiple discussion points in the thread
<<==

As a trial, I have created tables in the Github wiki to summarize
 point of discussion and trying to fill it.
(Mainly for the people who are not following the detail of discussion).

If you find this useful, hopefully please add/edit/correct the table
 to reflect the final status of the discussion.

https://github.com/w3c/automotive/wiki

Best regards,
====================
Shinjiro URATA
ACCESS CO., LTD.
====================


2016-02-04 3:31 GMT+09:00 Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>:

> available at:
>  https://www.w3.org/2016/02/02-auto-minutes.html
>
> also as text below.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kazuyuki
>
> ---
>    [1]W3C
>
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
>
>                                - DRAFT -
>
>                              Automotive WG
>
> 02 Feb 2016
>
>    [2]Agenda
>
>       [2]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-automotive/2016Feb/0000.html
>
>    See also: [3]IRC log
>
>       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-auto-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>           Paul_Boyes, Junichi_Hashimoto, Kaz_Ashimura,
>           Shinjiro_Urata, Ted_Guild, Wonsuk_Lee,
>           Tatsuhiko_Hirabayashi, Dave_Jensen
>
>    Regrets
>    Chair
>           Paul
>
>    Scribe
>           kaz, ted
>
> Contents
>
>      * [4]Topics
>          1. [5]April f2f
>          2. [6]Issue 72
>          3. [7]Testing
>          4. [8]Security
>          5. [9]GENIVI W3C Liaison
>          6. [10]Conferences coming up
>          7. [11]Issue 72 (revisited)
>      * [12]Summary of Action Items
>      * [13]Summary of Resolutions
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>    <ted> [14]Ready Player One (banter while trying to identify
>    caller 1. a really fun book that is going to be turned into a
>    movie)
>
>      [14] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready_Player_One
>
>    <inserted> scribenick: kaz
>
>    paul: goes through the agenda
>    ... anything to add?
>
>    (nothing)
>
> April f2f
>
>    paul: Genivi will have its Member meeting in April
>    ... sent a message about hotel reservation
>    ... Soumya from Eurecom will make presentation
>    ... any questions?
>
>    junichi: goal of the f2f?
>
>    paul: Ryan Davis on media tuner
>    ... prime goal is going through the spec
>    ... testing
>    ... security
>    ... would coordinate discussion with Genivi
>    ... with Tier1 companies from Genivi
>    ... anything else?
>
>    junichi: wondering how to manage my contribution due to the
>    difficulty with schedule
>
>    paul: will be hard if you are not there...
>    ... would some document on what would you like to see
>
>    junichi: would be good to have Genivi guys
>
>    paul: Genivi has security guys
>    ... great to get what they think about Web technology
>    ... security, etc.
>    ... we should really get Continental, Visteon, Harman, etc.
>
>    ted: Junichi, if you can't make the f2f meeting
>    ... we have 2 days for the meeting?
>
>    paul: yes
>
>    ted: W3C session could be breakout calls
>    ... future collaboration between Genivi and W3C
>    ... Web browser PoC
>    ... very happy to have a pre meeting with Junichi on security
>    ... maybe by email we can have some discussion?
>
>    junichi: ok
>
>    hira: can you arrange a pre meeting on 26th of April on
>    security?
>
>    ted: can hold a Doodle poll to get good timing for everybody
>
>    kaz: not necessarily April 26th?
>
>    paul: but sooner?
>
>    ted: maybe a week before
>    ... can send a poll to the group public list
>
>    hira: junichi, when would be good for you?
>
>    junichi: f2f on 26 is ok
>    ... have to call when it's 27-28
>
>    kaz: junichi, do you mean you can come to Paris on April 26th?
>
>    (junichi is gone...)
>
>    kaz: junichi, do you mean you can come to Paris on April 26th?
>
>    junichi: yes
>    ... but not sure if security is a big topic
>
>    paul: would like to make security the center topic because
>    Genivi security guys will be there
>
>    kaz: do you think we can talk with the Genivi security guys as
>    well on 26th as a pre meeting?
>
>    paul: yes
>    ... we need to coordinate with them, though
>    ... Ted, what do you think?
>
>    ted: we had discussion during TPAC on what is needed
>    ... and we can get ideas from Genivi on what they're doing with
>    their stack
>    ... one of them is joining as an Invited Expert
>    ... probably he could provide his insight
>    ... would get broader input as well
>    ... make sense to have a separate security TF call
>    ... during the whole Genivi AMM, could have breakout sessions
>    ... some people may or may not members
>
>    paul: we can help them pre-coordinate
>
>    kaz: so you agree to have a pre-meeting with Hashimoto-san on
>    April 26th
>
>    junichi: tx
>
>    hira: btw, KDDI is not a Genivi member, but can we join the AMM
>    meeting?
>
>    kaz: is the Genivi meeting for us will be Open Day again?
>
>    ted: W3C f2f meeting will be held during the Open Day
>    ... totally separate from Genivi
>
>    kaz: so theoretically, we'll invite Genivi guys to our meeting
>    in Paris/
>
>    ted: W3C is not part of Genivi, but I can ask them to let us
>    join (some of) their sessions
>
>    paul: e.g., sessions they're debating
>
>    kaz: so Hira-san doesn't have to worry
>
>    paul: anything else?
>
>    (nothing)
>
> Issue 72
>
>    <kaz> [15]https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/72
>
>      [15] https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/72
>
>    <kaz> [16]Invitation for the WG call on Issue 72
>
>      [16]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-automotive/2016Feb/0006.html
>
>    <kaz> [17]Paul's message on the Vehicle API Creation Guidelines
>
>      [17]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-automotive/2016Feb/0008.html
>
>    paul: will set up a call on the Issue 72 next week
>    ... really clear to me this issue is regarding the level of
>    APIs
>    ... vehicle data from car
>    ... I posted API guideline
>    ... Kevron agrees to join the call
>    ... think we can come to the conclusion
>    ... without going into the details
>
>    kaz: +1
>
>    urata: do we have TAG response?
>    ... they posted some comments but their conclusion would be
>    gotten at their next meeting
>
>    <ted> [18]https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/
>
>      [18] https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/
>
>    paul: they didn't look at the Issue 72
>    ... so would suggest they look at the Issue 72
>
>    <ted> [they just had their f2f meeting, unsure of their next
>    telconfernce. looking]
>
>    ted: not seeing response
>    ... still have a call next call
>    ... Tobie to understand our intention during a broader call
>    ... TAG had a f2f meeting, and will have calls every a couple
>    of weeks
>    ... conventions of APIs changes anyhow
>    ... more important is adoption to usage
>
>    paul: Tobie was thinking about a bunch of sensors
>    ... there are multiple issues on the thread
>    ... how do you clean up your garbage
>    ... would see a creation guideline
>
>    <ted> Paul++ for scheduling all these one on one calls in
>    addition to this WG call to clear this up and get various
>    perspectives
>
>    kaz: +1
>
>    paul: Dave, do you have any comments?
>
>    dave: no
>
>    paul: Tobie brought up good points
>
>    ted: please try to read the issue before the call
>
>    paul: there is app lifecycle as well
>
>    ted: different time out
>
>    paul: app lifecyle is outside of the spec, though
>    ... running in the foreground or background, etc.
>
> Testing
>
>    paul: Peter is not here
>
> Security
>
>    junichi: would like to put ideas from the specs to a Security
>    Note
>
>    paul: great
>    ... regarding the call for issue 72
>    ... planning to have it at 9:30am PST with Tobie
>
>    wonsuk: 2:30am for us...
>
>    hira: too difficult
>
>    paul: any suggestions?
>
>    wonsuk: will be recorded in the minutes?
>    ... we can read the minutes later
>    ... then if we have concerns, we can raise an issue
>
>    urata: what Wonsuk said is OK
>    ... but I can join the call myself :)
>
>    wonsuk: anyway, can read the minutes from the call and raise
>    issues if needed
>
>    paul: ok
>
>    ted: a couple of quick things
>
> GENIVI W3C Liaison
>
>    ted: had Genivi/W3C Liaison call
>    ... biggest topic was LBS API
>    ... collaboration more actively
>    ... also testing plan
>
> Conferences coming up
>
>    <ted> [19]Roundtable at TU Cybersecurity (Michigan, US) 29-30
>    March
>
>      [19] http://www.tu-auto.com/cyber-security/conference-agenda.php
>
>    <ted> [20]WWW 2016 (Montreal, CA) 13-14 April
>
>      [20] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/w3c-track.html
>
>    <ted> [21]AC at MIT (Boston, US) 20-22 March
>
>      [21] https://www.w3.org/Member/Meeting/2016ac/March/Overview.html
>
>    ted: and the other item is conferences coming up
>    ... as above
>    ... W3C round table
>    ... TU cybersecurity in Michigan
>    ... discounting for W3C Members
>
>    <ted>
>    [22]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2016JanMa
>    r/0051.html (W3C Member-only)
>
>      [22]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2016JanMar/0051.html
>
>    ted: WWW Conference in Montreal in April
>    ... somebody interested can have Automotive talks
>    ... if there are enough people from the WG, can have a session
>    ... lastly AC meeting at MIT on March 20-22
>    ... have a session on industry vertical including automotive
>    ... if your AC is interested, we can send an invitation
>
>    paul: ok
>    ... anything else?
>
> Issue 72 (revisited)
>
>    hira: can I go back to the API discussion?
>    ... had some discussion on Issue 72 last week
>    ... didn't see big advantage with the new proposal
>    ... so would clarify Pros/Cons of the current API and the new
>    proposal
>
>    paul: can ask people to clarify Pros/Cons
>    ... who should we ask about that?
>    ... would go through the thread and summarize it
>    ... after the meeting next week, we should clarify that
>
>    <inserted> scribenick: ted
>
>    kaz: if there is not a clear compromise after next week's call
>    we should have a deeper discussion
>
>    <inserted> scribenick: kaz
>
>    urata: agree with Hira-san, and would clarify the discussion
>    points
>    ... because there are multiple discussion points in the thread
>
>    wonsuk: agree we need clarification
>
>    [ adjourned ]
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> Summary of Resolutions
>
>    [End of minutes]
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version
>     1.144 ([24]CVS log)
>     $Date: 2016/02/03 18:26:53 $
>
>      [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>      [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>
>

-- 
.
Received on Monday, 8 February 2016 11:25:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 24 October 2017 18:52:45 UTC