Hi David,
AMB is meant to be an implementation of the W3C Vehicle API Spec, so they are 
already unified. (There are some variations in that AMB was developed as the 
spec was being written and was still evolving, and both are still evolving 
currently. But it is absolutely the intention that AMB aligns with the spec.)

-Brett

From: David Katz <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2014 at 6:35 AM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: AMB vs W3C Vehicle API Specification

Hi,

I have been looking at the interfaces offered by the AMB, and obviously see 
quite an overlap with the W3C Vehicle API Specification.
http://otcshare.github.io/automotive-message-broker/html/annotated.html
vs
https://rawgit.com/w3c/automotive-bg/master/snapshots/data_spec_snapshot_latest.html

Ignoring language syntax for a second and just looking at these as abstract 
interfaces offering vehicle data to compatible applications in a 
OEM-independant way, what speaks against unifying the two concepts to support a 
common set of interfaces and attributes?

Cheers,
David Katz


--
BMW Car IT GmbH
David Katz
Petuelring 116
80809 München

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BMW Car IT GmbH
Geschäftsführer: Michael Würtenberger und Reinhard Stolle
Sitz und Registergericht: München HRB 134810
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
IVI mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/ivi

Reply via email to