...
- Partial capturing of the Q&A
- slide deck
- Geotab - Glenn: gives the example of the lidar sensor that can spot available parking spots, can it be part of the VSS ?
- Benjamin: yes, we can model it as an extension
- Gerald: from the lidar, you get only a low-level information which is the distance-to-obstacle and if you look at the map, parking spots are not identified, much more processing is required, IMHO it is a very complex example
- Glenn: the purpose was to propose a use case outside the transportation itself
- Gunnar: reminds the audience about the dynamic agents concept that was pushed by JLR (capabilities to execute some highly-constrained code that can be uploaded on the vehicle)
- Keith: question on sensor description, how to push the VSS to an official standard like SAE/ISO or IEEE, how do we get broader adoption for VSS ?
- Glenn: we need to do dissemination among more OEMs
- FCA: we are looking into this, we are exploring it
- consultant: OEMs are afraid to lose their "secret" data, to get better value for the car, we should look at what other in telecoms did, in my opinion, there is a no secret data
- Gunnar: we need to understand how to write a contract for a data
- Keith: no data is secret, OEMs want to own the data and sell them
- X (consultant): telecom industry tried to keep the data proprietary but failed
- Keith: reminds the safety critical aspects of data
- Keith: why do google move to autonomous driving ? because of the data, Google wants to be in the revenue stream
- Y: VSS is a human readable description, OEMs are currently concerned by the telephone bills, is VSS the right modeling approah ?
- FCA: data means also taking commands from the cloud to the vehicle
- discussion on engineering units
- what are the data actually representing the driver's action on the accelerator pedal ? pedal position or pressure on the pedal ?
- Benjamin: should we include in VSS the AD(Autonomous Driving) vehicle sensors and the brand new IVI features ?
- Alex: I disagree with the way the VSS tree is currently described, I would prefer everything to be described in the vehicle data tree, no proprietrary extensions
- X (consultant): we need to push something useful and comprehensive enough to get accepted
...
{"serverDuration": 830, "requestCorrelationId": "f3c6e4947ffe6e75"}