[auto-bg/genivi-collab] minutes - 10 May 2016

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-auto-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks,

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                  Automotive BG + GENIVI Collaboration

10 May 2016

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-auto-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Kaz_Ashimura, Adam_Crofts, Paul_Boyes,
          Tatsuhiko_Hirabayashi, Shinjiro_Urata, Wonsuk_Lee,
          Qing_An, Junichi_Hashimoto, Kevin_Gavigan, Robert_Shape,
          Yingying_Chen, Philippe_Robin, Ted, Arthur_Taylor

   Regrets
   Chair
          Wonsuk, Paul, QingAn

   Scribe
          kaz

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Today's agenda
         2. [5]Recap from the f2f in Paris
         3. [6]LBS
         4. [7]SOTA
         5. [8]Manufacturer engagement
         6. [9]telco schedule
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

Today's agenda

   wonsuk: shows today's agenda

   <scribe> agenda:
   [11]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform
   /2016May/0000.html

     [11]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform/2016May/0000.html

   ->
   [12]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform
   /2016May/0000.html agenda

     [12]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform/2016May/0000.html

   wonsuk: recap f2f, scope/roadmap for LBS/Media tuner, SOTA

   ->
   [13]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform
   /2016May/0005.html updated agenda

     [13]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-autowebplatform/2016May/0005.html

   wonsuk: manufacturer engmement, EV support
   ... this is my first charing the BG, please let me know if
   anything missing
   ... let's start with recap f2f

Recap from the f2f in Paris

   wonsuk: we have demos, conceptual discussion

   -> [14]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/26-auto-minutes security day

     [14] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/26-auto-minutes

   -> [15]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/28-auto-minutes day 1

     [15] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/28-auto-minutes

   -> [16]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-auto-minutes day 2

     [16] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-auto-minutes

   wonsuk: shows the minutes from day2
   ... navigation web api

   -> [17]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-auto-minutes#item02
   Navigation Web API

     [17] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-auto-minutes#item02

   wonsuk: Philippe Colliot gave presentation on GENIVI's
   Navigation Web API work
   ... changing from the QML-based HMI to HTML5-based one
   ... we need to define data set
   ... we'll first try websocket-based api for this (=LBS)
   ... and then think about WebIDL-based API
   ... people agreed that websocket-based approach would be more
   flexible
   ... and easy to implement
   ... any additional comments?
   ... think that was the most important decision

   kaz: the f2f discussion also included the conclusion on API
   styling that we'll continue the work on the Vehicle API spec
   and the Vehicle Data spec
   ... and new work proposal on GENIVI VSS, LBS, SOTA, etc.

   wonsuk: some of them are rather WG topics

   kaz: right
   ... so we should be clear about what to be done by the BG
   ... and what for the WG

   wonsuk: new topics, e.g., SOTA, should be done by the BG

   paul: vehicle api/data spec and websocket version of them
   should be done by the WG
   ... others should be done by the BG
   ... security/privacy will be handled by both the groups

   wonsuk: goes to SOTA topic

   -> [18]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/28-auto-minutes#item08 SOTA
   RVI API

     [18] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/28-auto-minutes#item08

   wonsuk: we need to investigate what to do
   ... big benefit for the ecosystem
   ... REST-based API for SOTA server is required for the SOTA
   manager apps
   ... not for the app developers outside
   ... including public developers
   ... they can also make apps using the APIs
   ... but in case of SOTA, not sure if the APIs are enough for
   them

   paul: provisioning and administering
   ... administration of SOTA

   wonsuk: what I have in mind is introduction of SOTA
   ... want to have more discussion about this within the group
   ... if we get consensus that SOTA is important for the
   automotiv ecosystem, then we should create the TF
   ... but we need to investigate whether we need to create APIs
   for this purpose
   ... what do you think?

   kaz: and you think we should do that investigation by the whole
   BG before creating a TF?

   wonsuk: right
   ... we need to have more meeting with GENIVI
   ... to see how we should handle this topic within the BG

   kaz: make sense

   paul: make sense to me too

   wonsuk: that's my recap from the Paris meeting
   ... anything else to be added?

   <QingAn> * maybe because of the poor signal, I cannot hear any
   voice from my side

LBS

   wonsuk: roadmap for LBS?
   ... Qing An?

   <QingAn> * I suggest to skip to next one, while I reconfigure
   the setting

   wonsuk: we need to put the information on the BG wiki
   ... and ask the BG participants for reviews

   <QingAn> * yes, but I no voice

   wonsuk: to elaborate the description

SOTA

   wonsuk: next is SOTA
   ... introduction during the last f2f meeting in Paris

   <wonsuk> [19]http://pdxostc.github.io/rvi_sota_server/ GENIVI's
   SOTA project

     [19] http://pdxostc.github.io/rvi_sota_server/

   -> [20]http://pdxostc.github.io/rvi_sota_server/dev/api.html
   Web server API

     [20] http://pdxostc.github.io/rvi_sota_server/dev/api.html

   <ted> [there is some confusion on how to handle conflicting
   days when both genivi coordination calls and w3c business group
   calls]

   wonsuk: want to have some more discussion about SOTA Web API
   ... how it would be beneficial to the Automotive ecosystem?

   arthor: we're trying more open standard API
   ... want to standardize APIs on the server side
   ... tools and services to be integrated with existing
   commercial OTI services
   ... creating standard interface would allow people for that
   ... not really specific to automotive industry
   ... developing this API would be applicable to other sectors
   too

   wonsuk: could you please give some more explanation on embedded
   uses?

   arthor: vehicles are basically embedded devices
   ... development is often slow and difficult to manage
   ... having more standards would let people develop systems more
   easily

   wonsuk: integrated with the existing SOTA servers?
   ... some third party developers might have solutions

   author: exposing entire server interface for embedded software
   architecture

   paul: really interesting in general
   ... not fully understood at the moment
   ... would suggest we put an action for investigation
   ... REST-based interface for administration, etc.

   arthor: we did open-based protocol
   ... what we have so far is Web API
   ... think it would be relevant to W3C
   ... we're talking about the interface for the SOTA server
   ... delivery for automotive systems

   paul: REST interface for the server side is included in the
   scope. right?
   ... other pieces are not clear enough
   ... have to look into that
   ... what kind of protocols?
   ... how does that work?

   arthor: we need features to device wake-up, etc.
   ... we have reference implementations

   paul: the question is that I need to look into the Web server
   API spec
   ... would have action item

   rudi: agree with you
   ... would see why standardization on the server side would be
   beneficial
   ... simple integration task
   ... we can look into the spec

   robert: the reason I'm involved is because software talks with
   different kind of cars
   ... value to be added to my software

   arthor: right
   ... having standard interface would be beneficial
   ... not sure if the idea of RESTful interface for managing the
   server side would be useful to W3C

   robert: tx for your clarification

   kaz: wondering if the data property for SOTA Web API is related
   to the data definition of VSS

   arthor: no relationship with VSS

   paul: communication with web application
   ... also interface between cloud and cars
   ... still I would like to see the detail of the SOTA Web server
   API

   <scribe> ACTION: paul to look into the detail of the SOTA Web
   server API [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-auto-minutes.html#action01]

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-auto-minutes.html#action01

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-16 - Look into the detail of the sota
   web server api [on Paul Boyes - due 2016-05-17].

   wonsuk: ok
   ... we need more discussion
   ... Paul will bring some more concrete opinions for the
   upcoming calls

Manufacturer engagement

   wonsuk: would like to ask Robert for opinions

   robert: can you clarify what you mean by "manufacture
   engagement"?
   ... it would be useless unless the manufacturers are involved
   ... do we have data manifest for manufactures?

   paul: we had somebody from Honda at the Paris meeting
   ... would be great to have even more manufacturers
   ... OEMs, Tier1s

   robert: ok

   paul: have talked with many of them so far

   robert: what is the difference with JLR?

   rudi: JLR is the pioneer in this area
   ... reference implementation on Linux
   ... we have to leverage open standards, open platform, etc.
   ... would like to see vehicle manufacturers will be on board

   robert: sounds great

   rudi: doing everything to be publicized
   ... collaboration between GENIVI and W3C

   paul: reference implementation would be useful
   ... have to see that
   ... the question is when other OEMs will join

   rudi: would like to see some sort of Hackathon when we hold the
   next f2f in Portland in June/July

   robert: sounds good
   ... you can probably talk with other manufacturers and invite
   them
   ... from my point of view, "manufacture engagement" has been
   covered
   ... what about manufacturers of EVs?
   ... anybody have any feedback?
   ... would like to see what happened

   paul: regarding EV from the vehicle information viewpoint,
   people interested will drive it
   ... and give you feedback
   ... would like to suggest you also participate

   robert: happy to do that

   paul: have to drop

   kaz: maybe we might want to have a TF for communications with
   automotive industry

   robert: sounds like a good idea

   kaz: would be great

   robert: ok
   ... will do

   <QingAn> * can you hear me?

   <ted> [it was on vss and electric vehicles. basically robert
   you and volker should submit their ideas and the process is
   clear]

   kevin: part of the reasons why manufactures are not really
   involved is it would be a big decision for them to participate
   in W3C

   kaz: Ted suggests Robert and Volker submit their ideas

   wonsuk: good idea
   ... they can put their ideas on the wiki and we can get reviews

   kaz: initial discussion on emails?

   wonsuk: that's fine

   kaz: Robert, you can send a brief summary message to the ML
   (public-autowebplatform@w3.org)
   ... and include links to the GitHub repo

   wonsuk: ok

telco schedule

   wonsuk: we'll have telcos monthly
   ... the next call will be June the 7th
   ... same time as this call:
   ... * 8am US Pacific
   ... * 11am US Eastern
   ... * 5pm Europe
   ... * 11pm China
   ... * Midnight Korea/Japan

   wonsuk: would adjourn the meeting then
   ... please send your contributions to the ML
   ... and add them to the wiki

   [ adjourned ]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: paul to look into the detail of the SOTA Web
   server API [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-auto-minutes.html#action01]

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-auto-minutes.html#action01

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version
    1.128 ([24]CVS log)
    $Date: 2016/05/10 18:20:59 $

     [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/