Re: VISS version 2 review

Ulf and I met today to organize our thoughts on tour, areas we should
address and how to engage this group on VISSv2.

We would like to discuss the tour on 2 February 

* Invite Sebastian as Bosch has a VISS+REST implementation that we may
want to align with in the future

* Request Peter see what Volvo can share about their use of VISS in
vehicles

* in chartering issue around privacy (not settled, discussion ongoing)
you will note we are expected to create information architecture flow
and use cases and requirements. These will both assist in helping
people understand the uses and usefulness of VISS. We should hold a
FPWD until they are done

* we need to discuss what privacy considerations we can reasonable
include in VISS spec and what belongs more as best practices. We will
use the Best Practices call every other Monday to further that, getting
input from regular WG call as well.

* input on readability, areas in need of clarity, further diagrams etc.

We already identified some things in need of work, such as abstract
which is something I agreed to do before and will work on and review
with Ulf. We need clearer relationship and seek ways to avoid confusion
of having this split into two specs, ensure someone new to VISS can
understand. As mentioned the use cases and requirements document along
with information flow architectures including where VISS can reside
(in-vehicle, vehicle2cloud and in-cloud) will help.

On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 11:49 -0500, Ted Guild wrote:
> On yesterday's call we discussed how VISS version 2 is feature
> complete. Before issuing a call for consensus to publish a First
> Public
> Working Draft, we want to encourage a fuller read through by the
> group.
> 
> https://rawcdn.githack.com/w3c/automotive/64f3a1cfdd53ccb8411ccabb52e1cc39a7148d32/spec/VISSv2_Core.html
> 
> https://rawcdn.githack.com/w3c/automotive/64f3a1cfdd53ccb8411ccabb52e1cc39a7148d32/spec/VISSv2_Transport.html
>  
> Ulf and I will organize a higher level walk through, tour for 2
> February and everyone is encouraged to read independently.
> 
> For smaller fixes, please provide input if not alternate wording to a
> catch all issue.
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/automotive/issues/364
> 
> More substrantive change suggestions and concerns that will likely
> require further discussion, please create new issues.
> 
-- 
Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
W3C Automotive Lead
https://www.w3.org/auto