W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-autowebplatform@w3.org > June 2017

Re: Short Introduction

From: Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:48:21 -0400
Message-ID: <1497372501.2627.115.camel@w3.org>
To: Gunnar Andersson <gandersson@genivi.org>, Jonas Schmidt <jos89@gmx.de>
Cc: public-autowebplatform@w3.org, PHILIPPE COLLIOT <philippe.colliot@mpsa.com>
In addition to this email thread, I think it would be great to have
Jonas, Gunnar, Qing An and Philippe (others welcome) together on a call
on LBS. BG call didn't work out and unsure if all will be attending the
RSI call tomorrow.

https://www.w3.org/community/autowebplatform/wiki/RSITaskForce#Teleconference

Given how the timezones for the core participants are CET and CST I
proposed times that would most likely be reasonable for them without
being in the middle of the night for myself (EST). I can start as early
as 6am any day next week other than Wednesday. You are welcome to meet
without me as well and only ask that you take notes to share with the
group. I would be happy to setup a teleconference bridge.

https://doodle.com/poll/evgx5wqku75rwuet

Unless we settle on one of the later times this will be too early for
participants from PST.

On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 13:35 +0200, Gunnar Andersson wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 10:20 +0200, Jonas Schmidt wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Gunnar,
> > 
> > > 
> > > But that's assuming that the REST architecture pattern fits into
> > > an
> > >  automotive environment... 
> > >  ;-)   I'm just kidding - it's a good thesis subject, I'm sure.
> > I hope so. :D
> > 
> > > 
> > >  So you used the use-cases but not the GENIVI LBS APIs?  It seems
> > > an
> > >  unnecessary reinvention to not reuse the names of properties
> > > and 
> > such that
> > > 
> > >  many others are used to?  Also if you did, it would be easier to
> > > draw
> > the interesting thesis conclusions in my opinion (see below).
> > 
> > Actually I used the terms described in the single descriptions of
> > the use
> > cases and the names of the functions mentioned in the right column
> > of
> > https://at.projects.genivi.org/wiki/display/NAV/IVI+NavigationW3CUs
> > eCasesA
> > ndGENIVIAPIs
> > But I am open for any suggestions concerning the naming of the
> > properties.
> Good, and I think if you look at the actual APIs you will have a lot
> more
> detail to work from than only the use case page.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > What were the assumptions going into your project that made you
> > > do it
> > that
> > > 
> > >  way?
> > I wanted to create micro services that are "as restful as"
> > possible. I
> > tried to include concepts like separation of concerns etc. My
> > proposal is
> > just a first draft so as I sad I'm open for any suggestions.
> > 
> > > 
> > >  This is good and similar to what GENIVI has been looking at in
> > > this area
> > >  too.  Essentially we are interested in investigating the result
> > > of
> > taking a
> > > 
> > >  comprehensive LBS API that has been published, most of which are
> > > of
> > Remote-Procedure-Call + Signal type...
> > 
> > I think you're talking about the xml api specification of the
> > GENIVI API
> > which you want to use for api generation. (did I get this right) To
> > be honest: I did not examined the xml yet.
> Yes but it should be much easier to read in Franca IDL format
> (.fidl), and
> nowadays the Franca definition is also the official source code for
> the
> GENIVI LBS APIs.  It replaces the older XML definitions.
> 
> So if you want to read the straight-up API files, see [1].
> 
> Also as an example of what we can do there is also this test
> generation at
> [2].   That project takes the LBS APIs in Franca and generates C++
> headers
> and classes.  I don't claim it's a final and fully usable C++ format
> for
> programming, but more as a proof of concept.  
> 
> After running Doxygen over the C++ code, you get documentation that
> is quite
> readable.  It obviously has some C++ flavor but it provides it in a
> nicely
> structured format.
> 
> The C++/Doxygen generation is just an example.  If I get clear
> indication
> from either Web or LBS people about what format we _want_ to get out,
> based
> on the Franca input, then it should not be a too big deal to modify
> code
> generators to make that happen.  I actually think it will be a lot
> easier 
> than the C++ was.
> 
> By the way, this python generation framework is an alternative. We're
> also
> looking to extend the Franca tooling that is in Eclipse environment
> similarly and the aim of that is getting both Web APIs and relevant
> binding
> code directly out of the IDL definitions.
> 
> I'm sure Philippe Colliot can guide you to additional documentation,
> or
> answer more questions on LBS documentation and such.
> 
> Sincerely,
> - Gunnar
> 
> [1] https://github.com/GENIVI/navigation/tree/master/api/franca/navig
> ation
> [2] https://gunnarx.github.io/pyfrancagen/annotated.html
> 
> > 
> > [trimmed]
> -- 
> Gunnar Andersson <gandersson@genivi.org>
> Development Lead
> GENIVI Alliance
> 
> 
> 
> 
-- 
Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
W3C Systems Team
http://www.w3.org


Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2017 16:48:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 June 2017 16:48:32 UTC