W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-automotive@w3.org > September 2017

Re: Request to make the issue list for VISS

From: Gunnar Andersson <gandersson@genivi.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 10:50:29 +0200
Message-ID: <1504774229.19323.220.camel@genivi.org>
To: 이원석 <wonsuk.lee@etri.re.kr>, "Gavigan, Kevin" <kgavigan@jaguarlandrover.com>
Cc: "Crofts, Adam" <acrofts1@jaguarlandrover.com>, public-automotive <public-automotive@w3.org>

Wonsuk, Kevin, and all,

On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 02:15 +0000, 이원석 wrote:
> Kevin.
> Thanks for summary for VISS issue we have. Only outstanding issue to go CR
> is #223 (wwwivi). To me, Hyojin’s proposal(using .local) could be an one
> of possible solution. But It seem need to have more broader feedback
> including OEM and related companies. I think we need to get a feedback
> from GENIVI side as well. Right? Anyone can follow up? Or Is it already on
> going?

I have only been reading through the GitHub comments to try to understand
but unfortunately I have not been part of the original discussions.

Just off hand I have difficulty buying into the idea of a new top-level
domain (and in particular "wwwivi"), and also in fact assigning a special
meaning for "ivi.w3.org" or similar.  In general I wonder if automotive
really needs anything new and unique here.

But before I dig into that, maybe check that I have not misunderstood. 
Could someone just review again, what is the original idea and the problem
that needs to be solved?  Just starting at the top level, why is _anything_
needed here?  (Sorry for not having the background clear).

Is it that all systems should be able to rely on a particular special domain
name existing, and after name resolution, the server answering there is
guaranteed to always be providing a VISS service?  The domain name translate
through local name resolution to an appropriate IP, right.  Is this server
always local or possibly also remote?


- Gunnar


>  
> Kind regards,
> Wonsuk.
>  
> From: Gavigan, Kevin [mailto:kgavigan@jaguarlandrover.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2017 11:21 PM
> To: 이원석 <wonsuk.lee@etri.re.kr>
> Cc: Crofts, Adam <acrofts1@jaguarlandrover.com>; public-automotive <public
> -automotive@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Request to make the issue list for VISS
>  
> Hi Wonsuk,
>  
> Good to hear from you and great to hear that there is a consensus to bring
> VISS and VIAS to CR before the upcoming TPAC. 
>  
> Adam and I have been working thru the VISS issues when we could in
> background and as far as I know, they have been either been cleared and
> closed  or we are almost ready to merge (e.g. #226)
>  
> The only exception is #223 (wwwivi) - we would very much appreciate
> feedback from the group on how we should proceed.
>  
> If we can resolve #223, we could potentially be in position to propose
> moving to CR within a few days...
>  
> Kind regards,
>  
> Kev
>  
>  
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2017 08:51:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 24 October 2017 18:52:54 UTC