> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dev [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dominig ar Foll
> (Intel OTC)
> Sent: Friday, September 5, 2014 9:53 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Dev] Tizen 3 services: use case for multi user
> 
> 
> > I think each seat should have it's own BT adapter named appropriately,
> > and then each user can pair devices on their own seat and the pairing
> > data is stored in user's home directory.
> >
> > Seat tagging based on USB device trees works already just fine.
> IVI Head unit will not have as many adaptor than we have people in the car.

I would agree with Dominique on this supposition.

> Furthermore the requirement from Genivi is that a user application can be
> moved from one seat to an other without disconnection, so the binding
> between a seat an a user does not exist.
> We need to share BT adaptor between users which is why we need a BT
> framework on top of BlueZ to manage those issues.

In a shared adaptor model, with multiple potential users, how is it expected 
Murphy, the policy engine, interacts?
You may want to consider that a product may wish to employ policy on top of 
functionality - i.e. just because you can practically allow 
4 devices to pair, you might not want to allow this because it doesn't match 
your UI behavior expectations? Having hooks to control this may be useful....?

Then to the concrete example of contact sync. Perhaps the thought process 
should expand beyond muti-user vis-à-vis devices and encompass how to 
handle/manage the data and the type of data?
I could think of some scenarios where I would have a userA wanting to pair 
(own) UserB's device.
If you sit the contacts into the user home dir, you could end up with a 
duplication of the contact db on the system - No?

Second angle to consider here is this. If I've enough access to the vehicle, 
the likely hood is I'm in the same social circle as others who also share that 
vehicle. Ergo a high probability that two users overlap on contacts. That 
observation could also expand to the corporate car market, where the social 
circle is the enterprise address book. It may break down for the shared car or 
rental sector. With a per user storage solution, you have challenges in 
optimizing for storage - why store and identical contact in 2 locations? Why 
store 2 identical albums on the device? It may seem like unnecessary 
complication, but consider knock on impact to eMMC wearout issues and 15year 
lifetime expectations in the auto sector.

Would it be worth considering, from a device perspective it knows only of its 
MAC address and a PIN to auth.
PIN is loosely coupled to the user, but from a BT spec perspective, the 
protocol has no real concept of the user.
Then following this, could it make sense that you store the contacts in some 
[whateverpath/BTMACADDR]? Or have a central storage location and tag the 
contact to the btaddr - identify duplicates and augment the association with 
the additional btaddr?
Then layer user meta data above this.
At the end of the day, some OEMs (IVI) may view it a feature that it has 1 
system contact address book, it may choose to a) segregate this so the contacts 
are viewed per device or b) harmonize the address book into 1 list (perhaps 
filtering out duplicates - after all if you are willing to share a ride with 
someone, you probably know the same people too). I could also foresee that it 
reasonable that when sitting with my partner, I want to use my device to make a 
call to a contact stored in her addressbook. 
Finally, having a device orientated store structure could offer some advantage 
to purging data - for rental cars, I may want to have a generic 'guest' (or 
even have a pay-per service model where when renting, could 'upgrade' guest to 
enable navigation for a fee), so I may want to invoke the user concept to 
bucket different services, but I need a way to legally adhere to the data 
protection act by purging the addressbook without having to delete /recreate 
the user profile - less erase/rewrites helps my flash memory longevity - which 
is a far bigger issue for IVI than multiuser, as the typical head unit 
replacement cost - parts and labor - could reach $3000. 

> 
> Dominig
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
--------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Shannon Limited
Registered in Ireland
Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare
Registered Number: 308263
Business address: Dromore House, East Park, Shannon, Co. Clare

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole 
use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is 
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the 
sender and delete all copies.


_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to