Meeting Minutes: 2025/03/25 OpenSCENARIO DSL CCB
| Location | MS Teams |
| Date | 25/03/2025 |
| Time | 14:00 to 15:00 (CET) |
| Note taker | CoPilot |
Antitrust reminder
Every participant acknowledges that they know the content of the antitrust reminder: ASAM Antitrust Reminder
Participants
| Participant | Company | Presence |
|---|---|---|
| @anandraj.desai.vayavyalabs | Vayavya Labs | N |
| @dCarruth | Mississippi State University | N |
| @fbock | CARIAD SE | N |
| @gil.amid , @robert.scholz, @rhadar | Foretellix | Y |
| @Kathy.Zhao | Bosch | N |
| @kyucheol.choi | AVL | N |
| @n.ochoa | DENSO Automotive | Y |
| @pmai | PMSF IT | Y |
| @Rolf.Magnus2 | Akkodis | Y |
| @Wenyuan.Wei | CATARC | N |
| @Max.Bauer | Bosch | Y |
| @AhmedSadek @yash.shah @dsanchez | ASAM Office | Y |
Agenda/Goals
| TOP | Topic | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Discussion on #804 | open |
| 2 | Discussion on P_2025_02-006: Additional Language Constructs in OpenSCENARIO DSL simulation/openx#10 | Open |
| 3 | DSL Maintenance: simulation/openx#30 | Open |
| 4 | Meeting minutes handling / storage | |
Minutes
Generated by AI. Be sure to check for accuracy.
Meeting notes:
- Meeting Minutes and Document Storage: Diego discussed the setup of a SharePoint called Open X POC for storing meeting minutes and project documents. He mentioned that individual libraries have been organized for each project and CCB, and access will be granted to specific projects or CCBs.
- Postponement of Discussion on #804**:** Rolf requested to postpone the discussion on #804 to the next meeting due to personal reasons, and Gil suggested that Rolf communicate with @joel.greenyer , who will be joining the team to work on the open scenario DSL.
- Project Leadership and Progress: Gil provided an update on the project for additional language constructs. He mentioned that an internal meeting was held to figure out how to make progress, and issues were opened in the open scenario DSL GitLab repository for each feature being proposed. Gil also mentioned that different constructs were assigned to different team members to create initial proposals.
- Discussion on Project Meetings: Pierre inquired about the existence of a separate meeting series for the project, and Gil responded that no separate meeting had been started yet since it was decided to start the discussion in the CCB and work offline. Diego mentioned that they are working on unifying all open meeting series related to openX in a public calendar.
- Milestones and Issue Management: Pierre suggested creating clear milestones for the project and avoiding catch-all milestones like "future." He proposed having milestones like version 2.2 for release and version 2.1.1 for maintenance. Diego agreed to clean up the existing milestones and create new ones as suggested.
-
Discussion on Constants: Pierre raised a question about the semantics of constants and their relationship with parameters. Ronen explained that constants are meant to be compile-time variables that can be overridden using a set declaration. Pierre suggested that the term "constant" might be misleading and proposed defining them as compile-time derivable parameters.
- Semantics Question: Pierre raised a question about the semantics of constants and their relationship with parameters.
- Compile-Time Variables: Ronen explained that constants are meant to be compile-time variables that can be overridden using a set declaration.
- Terminology Suggestion: Pierre suggested that the term "constant" might be misleading and proposed defining them as compile-time derivable parameters to clarify their intended use.
- Implementation Discussion: The discussion included considerations about how constants should be implemented and the potential impact on the language and compiler behavior.
-
Geodetic Position Types: Max explained the need for adding geodetic position 3D and position 2D types. Nicolas and Pierre raised questions about the existing geodetic position 2D type and its lack of explanation regarding the height. They suggested clarifying the use cases and semantics of these types in the standard.
- Type Addition: Max explained the need for adding geodetic position 3D and position 2D types to address specific use cases in simulations.
- Existing Type Questions: Nicolas and Pierre raised questions about the existing geodetic position 2D type and its lack of explanation regarding the height, suggesting that this needs clarification in the standard.
- Use Case Clarification: They suggested clarifying the use cases and semantics of these types in the standard to ensure consistent implementation and understanding.
- Next Steps for Geodetic Position Types: Pierre suggested reserving time in the next CCB meeting to discuss the use cases and semantics of geodetic position types. He proposed writing down the code for different use cases and ensuring that the current specifications provide the desired semantics.
Follow-up tasks:
- Project Update: Communicate with Joel regarding the open scenario DSL and collaborate on the semantics chapter. (Rolf)
- Issue Review: Review the issues relevant to each company and evaluate if they can be categorized as maintenance issues. (All Participants)
- Constant Definition: Pass the feedback on the constant definition discussion to Robert for further refinement. (Ronen)
- Position Types Clarification: Review and clarify the descriptions of geodetic 2D and 3D positions in the adoc, including the handling of height in 2D positions. (Max, Nicolas)
- Position Types Discussion: Reserve time in the next CCB meeting to discuss the use cases and semantics of 2D and 3D positions. (All)