Closed UlfBj closed 3 years ago
In VSSo @klotzbenjamin uses the Vehicle branch as a root branch instead of
I think Vehicle is a good name for the root.
I think Chassis Body, Drivetrain, ADAS, etc should be placed together under one branch node, as I see them logically to belong to the same domain. But as it is hard to find a good name for that domain, maybe that indicates it is not a coherent logical group. But this is more a matter of taste, I will not insist on my view.
What I would like to insist on, however, is that the inclusion shown below is changed.
This clutters the level directly under the root with nodes like IgnitionOnTime, etc. I think this should be gathered under a branch node, and not be directly under the root. The Vehicle.vspec file name is not so well chosen either, being the same as the root name.
BR Ulf
I think Chassis Body, Drivetrain, ADAS, etc should be placed together under one branch node, as I see them logically to belong to the same domain. But as it is hard to find a good name for that domain, maybe that indicates it is not a coherent logical group. But this is more a matter of taste, I will not insist on my view.
If we find a domain within vehicle to group them, we can of course discuss it. I just would really like to avoid duplications in the path like, vehicle -> car -> ... I second your comment, that I don't see the logical connection right now either.
What I would like to insist on, however, is that the inclusion shown below is changed.
include Vehicle/Vehicle.vspec Vehicle
This clutters the level directly under the root with nodes like IgnitionOnTime, etc. I think this should be gathered under a branch node, and not be directly under the root. The Vehicle.vspec file name is not so well chosen either, being the same as the root name.
Do I understand right, that you want to have on the first level branches only? It would be a good compromise IMO. I'll think of a naming proposal. If you're faster, go ahead :)
Do I understand right, that you want to have on the first level branches only?
Yes.
It would be a good compromise IMO. I'll think of a naming proposal. If you're faster, go ahead :)
Right now I do not have a proposal, but I will also think of it.
Here is my proposal:
In Vehicle.vspec the vehicle identification data is already under the branch VehicleIdentification.
The following set, under Vehicle signals, I propose that all, except AmbientTemperature and IsMoving, is put under a branch called Statistics.
The following sets Spacial acceleration and Spacial rotation, I propose is put under a branch called Inertia, where also isMoving goes.
The attributes at the end goes under the VehicleIdentification branch. The accelerationTime is questionable to me.
Where AmbientTemperature goes I do not know.
Some comments:
Here is my proposal: In Vehicle.vspec the vehicle identification data is already under the branch VehicleIdentification. The following set, under Vehicle signals, I propose that all, except AmbientTemperature and IsMoving, is put under a branch called Statistics.
Statistics? This seems a odd name for grouping vehicle signals. What did you mean exactly?
The following sets Spacial acceleration and Spacial rotation, I propose is put under a branch called Inertia, where also isMoving goes.
+1
Statistics? This seems a odd name for grouping vehicle signals. What did you mean exactly? Most of them are accumulated values over time, IdleTime, DriveTime, etc.
I see now that one breaking that pattern is Speed, so it should be put elsewhere. Statistics is maybe not the best name, ‘Accumulated time’ is probably better.
Statistics? This seems a odd name for grouping vehicle signals. What did you mean exactly? Most of them are accumulated values over time, IdleTime, DriveTime, etc.
I see now that one breaking that pattern is Speed, so it should be put elsewhere. Statistics is maybe not the best name, ‘Accumulated time’ is probably better.
How about Vehicle.TripRecorder
? @rtroncy, @klotzbenjamin
How about Vehicle.TripRecorder? Better than Accumulated time.
Speed could go under Inertia (if we go with that).
How about
Vehicle.TripRecorder
? @rtroncy, @klotzbenjamin
You add a notion of Trip
that does not really exist. When are those values being reset? When you switch on/off the engine? When the engine car is going in sleeping mode? Recorder
is good as the underlying signals will indeed capture a phenomena that is accumulated over a period of time from my understanding. Again, what is the exhaustive list of signals that will be grouped under this branch?
They are found in the Vehicle.vspec file. https://github.com/GENIVI/vehicle_signal_specification/blob/master/spec/Vehicle/Vehicle.vspec
How about
Vehicle.TripRecorder
? @rtroncy, @klotzbenjaminYou add a notion of
Trip
that does not really exist. When are those values being reset? When you switch on/off the engine? When the engine car is going in sleeping mode?Recorder
is good as the underlying signals will indeed capture a phenomena that is accumulated over a period of time from my understanding. Again, what is the exhaustive list of signals that will be grouped under this branch?
I like the proposal to use simply Vehicle.Recorder
. Then I would put values like speed and ambientTemperature under it as well. First I thought about Vehicle.Status
but that's maybe a bit too generic.
I like the proposal to use simply Vehicle.Recorder. +1
Then I would put values like speed and ambientTemperature under it as well. Speed I think is more suitable in Inertia.
I like the proposal to use simply Vehicle.Recorder.
+1
Then I would put values like speed and ambientTemperature under it as well. Speed I think is more suitable in Inertia.
@UlfBj: is there any other signal you'd see there, besides speed?
Not in Vehicle.vspec. I have not checked other files.
Skickat från min Samsung Galaxy-smartphone.
-------- Originalmeddelande -------- Från: danielwilms notifications@github.com Datum: 2018-12-10 19:15 (GMT+01:00) Till: GENIVI/vehicle_signal_specification vehicle_signal_specification@noreply.github.com Kopia: "Björkengren, Ulf" ulf.bjorkengren@volvocars.com, Mention mention@noreply.github.com Rubrik: Re: [GENIVI/vehicle_signal_specification] Top nodes in VehicleSignalSpecification.vspec (#84)
Then I would put values like speed and ambientTemperature under it as well. Speed I think is more suitable in Inertia.
@UlfBjhttps://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FUlfBj&data=02%7C01%7Culf.bjorkengren%40volvocars.com%7C7f09e742e68e4baf86bd08d65ecb751b%7C81fa766ea34948678bf4ab35e250a08f%7C0%7C0%7C636800625263651241&sdata=9yjJWi0%2B%2BuQov8s7jui74L2fpmPNa71IRkO%2BWHOTF8w%3D&reserved=0: is there any other signal you'd see there, besides speed?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FGENIVI%2Fvehicle_signal_specification%2Fissues%2F84%23issuecomment-445916166&data=02%7C01%7Culf.bjorkengren%40volvocars.com%7C7f09e742e68e4baf86bd08d65ecb751b%7C81fa766ea34948678bf4ab35e250a08f%7C0%7C0%7C636800625263661254&sdata=Xim49wYRO9PRl%2Fx09iVxYuoVvoDmnSLfauO6OUhagY4%3D&reserved=0, or mute the threadhttps://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FAkkYQRZguysghPILP53gyhYiZ2LVOoR2ks5u3qS8gaJpZM4ZIeKt&data=02%7C01%7Culf.bjorkengren%40volvocars.com%7C7f09e742e68e4baf86bd08d65ecb751b%7C81fa766ea34948678bf4ab35e250a08f%7C0%7C0%7C636800625263661254&sdata=qXKfIKH5%2Bv6V%2BQ17OKhRpz8Vfih8H9rwTzcQr6ustOw%3D&reserved=0.
@rtroncy :+1 for grouping Chassis Body, Drivetrain, ADAS and some more (what is the exhaustive list?) under a common branch name
After discussing internally about a possible common branch name, the best we could come up with was "VehicleData".
Our view was that even if it is not a clean homerun, it is an improvement compared to having all these branches directly under the Vehicle root node.
Comments are welcome:).
done.
Under the root node Vehicle there is now, besides the Media node and the Private node, also also all the nodes like DriveTrain, Cabin, Body, ADAS, Chassis, and OBD. I think these should be pushed one level down, under a branch node that may have the name Car (from VIWI), or something else. The nodes mentioned above belong to the same logical domain, and should reside under a domain name node for these. It will be more comparable to the Media domain node, and further new domain nodes that might be added later.