On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:23 AM, David Katz <[email protected]> wrote: > Looks good, thanks! I had focused on the docs, which seem to document the > older attributes still. >
Right, the online docs are deficient since we switched to franca idl. Doxygen doesn't know how to create docs for franca at the moment. -Kevron > > -- > 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------- > > > > > On 09.09.2014 17:07, "Rees, Kevron" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Brett is correct. The intention is for the AMB data standard, which >>predates the w3c specification, to follow as closely as possible the >>w3c vehicle data specification. We've already started harmonizing and >>if you look through the amb DBus API IDL specification[1] you can see >>older interfaces/attributes being deprecated in favor of the new W3C >>interfaces/attributes. >> >>-Kevron >> >>[1] - >>https://github.com/otcshare/automotive-message-broker/blob/master/docs/amb >>.idl#L285 >> >>On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Branch, Brett <[email protected]> >>wrote: >>> 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 > _______________________________________________ IVI mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/ivi
