See also: IRC log
Rudi does roll call
Rudi: Ted can you please provide an update on staff resources concerning the group
Ted: Kaz is taking on new responsibilities as part of W3C's reorg plus in a number of other Working Groups so is resigning from Automotive
Rudi: Hira you voiced some
concerns about Kaz' participation
... I hope KDDI will continue in this capacity
Hira: this is upsetting to
Japanese members but understand the decision
... we would have preferred this be deferred until the spec
reaches CR
... Japanese OEM are looking at Smart Device Link and we want
to catch their attention as well
Rudi: SDLink is entirely
different and understand Toyota is considering that route
... that is more of a competition to other similar approaches
for pairing with smartphones than what we are doing
Hira: SDLink has already been
published in public and covers vehicle data and media,
including security
... this specification may be designed for automotive, smart
phone and tablet but we have to notice these activities for our
specification
Rudi: we have to monitor what is going in the industry
Hira: we want to compete in this specification race
Rudi: I do not think we are
competing with it directly
... we need to work on other domains (media etc) as we have
been discussing for next generation/after CR
Urata: can I discuss about the
Kaz topic
... Kaz was really a great help for Japanese members as English
is a big problem
... I know he is very busy but wondering if we could ask him to
help through the F2F
... I understand there are resource allocation matters
<Zakim> ted, you wanted to mention AGL and Japanese OEM
Rudi: that is more a question to W3C
Ted: we cannot provide native speakers for every Working Group for every nationality we have participants. I encourage anyone who has difficulty understanding any comment to ask by speaking up or in irc
Ted: we only have KDDI, Melco and ACCESS as participants. It would be great to have Toyota and other Japanese OEM (and Tier 1s) involved. Hopefully AGL's involvement will help with Toyota and others in time
Rudi: agree to Ted's point, if things are unclear please ask for clarification
Hira: can we ask him to join for WoT concerns?
Ted: for joint meetings with WoT like TPAC then yes we would reach out to him, the WoT lead Dave Raggett and their chairs
Urata: I have made some changes
to my prototype implementation in github
... the access control portion is currently empty and cannot
test the authorization piece
... I can implement the authorize method with a dummy
function
... this is a mock implementation but it is achievable. I will
continue this week and next
... the test cases will be complete by next week
... I have only used my test suite against my prototype
implementation and ask for others to run it against theirs
Rudi: I really appreciate your
effort and moving this forward swiftly
... I agree for the purpose of testing and especially since we
deferred on the authorization piece you approach is
reasonable
... perhaps in the next round (next gen) it would be more
explicit but it is left to implementers at this point
Urata: I tried to put the test
case on public server so people can run the framework
themselves
... from the description of the test suite it is suppose to
execute locally and it is not possible to run online
... I ask people download and run themselves and run
themselves
Rudi: I will ask Peter Winzell
from Melco to run the test suite against his implementation
that is running on the Genivi Development Platform
... SongLi perhaps you are interested in running it as well
SongLi: absolutely
<urata_access> https://github.com/aShinjiroUrata/web-platform-tests/tree/dev-urata-vsss-test
Ted: also worth asking Powell to
run it since he demoed VinLi's platform with VISS at Genivi
showcase during CES
... if it is at all possible to run online instead of locally
with /etc/hosts to have our static hostname, then I would be
willing to work with you (Urata) to run an instance at MIT
SongLi: having an online tester
would be beneficial
... we can skip certificates as well if they are a problem
Ted: benefit of an online test
serveris it provides and opportunity for soliciting
implementation reports
... I will also encourage those in the group to do short write
ups of their experiences in implementing
Rudi: Powell has been working on
the client side specification but there is still a gap
there
... he is not here but perhaps others may be able to
comment
Urata: I am in a discussion with
Rudi-san on authorization
... the authorize method according to the specification should
be done for data path and actions
... we may want to specify actions as a parameter to
authorization
... this piece is not clear enough to me yet
... leaving some things to be implementation dependent is ok
but we should confirm we can realize a system to authorize
properly with json web token or oauth
Hira: I have raised a question on 137
Hira: I want to add normative or non-normative by section on his generated document
Rudi: that could make sense,
please suggest which you feel should be normative in that issue
would help and we can then discuss further
... it will help to learn where we should be more specific
Hira: we may need this clearly defined in order to be able to make test assertions
Rudi: yes or it could be left to the implementer
Urata: the VIAS seems agnostic in
the manner it communicates
... it would be worth saying web sockets or http
... it has an assumption of using web sockets which is
different from our initial intent
... in the future it should be modified
Hira: next time we modify specification for high level api we should not touch the draft spec
Urata: changing the draft VIAS now isn't necessary
Hira: we would need to clarify normative and non-normative
Paul: is the concern about the VIAS spec being written to a socket?
Urata: if the group thinks VIAS should be written in a more agnostic manner we should remove socket from the spec
Paul: agree it should be
informative and not normative
... we said earlier that the developer shouldn't care how VIAS
talks to the service
... we do want the two specs to be consistent and
compatible
... the client spec is meant to stand on its own so it should
be non-normative on how it communicates
Rudi: we had agreed we wanted to
have some longer teleconferences to complete this work on the
specs and test suite
... the question is to start this week or next?
... there will be timezone conflicts as we are well aware
Ted: for me next week would be better as the following I will be in Chicago for coordinating Automotive and Web Payments at their F2F
Hira: can we have a doodle?
Rudi: sure
Urata: I would like to continue the discussion on VIAS and hope we can have a test implementation
Rudi: yes that would be necessary and hope something that Powell is working on
Urata: tests are necessary for CR?
Rudi: yes
Hira: I will generate test assertions in March
Ted: Genivi has confirmed space
during their All Member Meeting for the 10th and 11th
... I'll send email to the group list
[adjourned]