Project Proposal to Develop a New Standard
Universal Remote Console (URC)


 

1. Source of the Proposed Project

1.1 Title
 Universal Remote Console (URC)

1.2 Date Submitted
January 20, 2004 

1.3 Proposer(s)
The INCITS Information Technology Access Interfaces Technical Committee (INCITS/V2).

Four organizations (IBM, NIST, Panasonic, & Unisys) are members of both INCITS/V2 and the INCITS Executive Board.

2. Process Description for the Proposed Project

2.1 Project Type (Development or Revision)
Development ("D")

2.2 Type of Document
Standard

2.3 Definitions of Concepts and Special Terms
See attached: Terms of Reference

2.4 Expected Relationship with Approved Reference Models, Frameworks, Architectures, etc.
There are a number of existing protocol and modeling activities being undertaken by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), and other consortia and specification development activities that we are coordinating with.  We are working with INCITS/L8 to ensure that necessary data definitions, metadata, as well as shared data registry and registration authority definitions are specified correctly and similarly with INCITS/T4 to ensure that security and privacy issues are appropriately addressed.

2.5 Recommended INCITS Development Technical Committee (Existing)
The INCITS Information Technology Access Interfaces Technical Committee (INCITS/V2).

 

2.6 Anticipated Frequency and Duration of Meetings
INCITS/V2 meets 4 times a year at various locations throughout the U.S. in 2 to 4 day face to face plenary meetings.  Working meetings are held as needed by different ad hoc teams. These meetings are held by telephone conference, video conference, and other means when feasible to save time and resources and to allow maximum participation by the broadest spectrum of interested parties.  Over 50 of these working meetings have taken place over the last year.

2.7 Target Date for Initial Public Review (Milestone 4)
April 15, 2004
 
2.8 Estimated Useful Life of Standard or Technical Report
At least 5 years.

3. Business Case for Developing the Proposed Standard or Technical Report

3.1 Description
This proposed American National Standard will be one in a series supporting the development of  Universal Remote Consoles (URCs). The goal of this set of standards is to provide a framework of components that combine to enable remote User Interfaces and remote control of network accessible electronic devices and services through a Universal Remote Console (URC).

The V2 Technical Committee is developing a set of standards for the discovery, selection, configuration, and operation of user interfaces and options.  The purpose of these standards is to facilitate the development and deployment of a wide variety of devices (from different manufacturers) that can act as Universal Remote Consoles (URCs) for an equally varied range of devices and services (called "Targets").  In other words, the standards will allow users to control any number of Electronic and Information Technology devices in their environment.

The potential Targets include both devices and services.  They may range from things as simple as a light switch and thermostats, to more complex items such as audio visual equipment, home appliances, electronics in a car or other constrained or specialized environment, web-based services, and any other devices or services that can be controlled electronically (or via Communications or Information Technology -- CIT). 

Targets may be in the same location as the individual who desires to control the Target through the URC, or the Target can be at any distance from the URC/user, as long as there is some type of network connection between the URC and the Target.  This is possible since a URC provides the user with all of the necessary controls as well as the prompts and other information displayed by the Target.

URC functionality could be provided by common devices such as personal computing and Information Technology devices (e.g. laptops, PDAs), telecommunications/WAP devices (e.g. cell phones), etc. They could also be functions implemented in assistive technology devices, or they could be devices that were specially built to function as Universal Remote Consoles.  They may also be devices that were built to function primarily as Remote Consoles for a particular family of products (e.g. a Remote Console designed to control components of an integrated home audio-visual system), but would also serve to control any other device that is (V2) URC compatible.  They are similar in behavior to universal remote controls today, except

a) they have much greater function and scope,

b) they synchronize with the Target in both directions (i.e. they can display the current status of the Target),

c) they don't need to be programmed by the user, (since they will automatically discover devices that are controllable in a user's vicinity, discover the abstracted user interface of the Targets and present it in the way preferred by the user), and

d) depending on the networking technology used, they may be used out of sight of the product they are controlling.

 

The output interfaces provided by URCs could be all visual, all tactile, or all verbal in nature (or any combination thereof), because the (V2) URC specifies the content of a Target user interface independently from the form in which it is presented.  Similarly and for the same reason, the control interfaces may be by voice, keyboard, mouse or any other available technology.  Thus, URCs could be designed that an individual could talk to and, through the URC, the user could have speech access to any (V2) URC compatible Target listed above without any of these Targets having any voice recognition or voice control functionality themselves.  A person might, therefore, be able to say to their URC, "Record channel 12 and show me 'Law and Order'".  Or they could be laying in bed and say, "Set the alarm to 6:30 AM, turn the coffee on at 6:00 AM, and turn on the home security system".  Or, if one's spouse is already asleep, a person could pick up their PDA or any other (V2) URC compatible URC device and accomplish these same tasks silently either by calling up control panels or by issuing the instructions in writing. (The (V2) URC standard does not provide the natural language control, but would provide all of the information and control necessary for control by a natural language processing URC.)

The purpose of the Universal Remote Console specification efforts within V2 is to provide a framework of components that combine to enable remote User Interfaces and remote control of network-accessible electronic devices and services through a Universal Remote Console (URC).

This document provides an overview of the (V2) URC framework and its components.  The following additional documents will be defined in separate projects and specify specific languages and components of the (V2) URC standard.:

  • User Interface Socket Description
  • Presentation Templates
  • Resource Descriptions
  • Target Properties Sheet

3.2. Existing Practice and the Need for a Standard
No standard or specification exists for defining a user interface (UI) for an arbitrary electronic or information technology device or CIT service that is independent of mode of UI rendition or instanciation, along with the means for communicating such definitions and using them to achieve remote control of the device or service. Such mode independent UI descriptions together with robust specifications for UI rendition and instanciation , defining a "Universal Access Bus," are essential for simplifying and normalizing our increasingly complex, increasingly computer dominated environment. 

The existence of such a universal access bus for consumer products, environmental controls, appliances, web services, etc. will also benefit people with disabilities and the aging population by helping organizations meet state and Federal requirements for universal access to services, data, and information.

3.3. Implementation Impacts of the Proposed Standard

3.3.1 Development Costs
This Standard will be developed through the voluntary and cooperative efforts of INCITS Information Technology Access Interfaces Technical Committee (INCITS/V2) members. No significant development costs are anticipated.

3.3.2 Impact on Existing or Potential Markets
There is a burgeoning market already for personalization of content and appearance on the World Wide Web, with regard to small handheld devices and for commercial sales purposes.  Companies such as IBM, ATG and Vignette, among many others, have products and services for this explicit purpose.  This market is expected to grow considerably in the next 3 years.  There is also a movement  in the Web to provide sites of interest to people with disabilities (e.g., HalfthePlanet, WeMedia, CanDo) and the aging population (e.g., SeniorNet), and attempts to bring the W3C WAI recommendations into these.  Alternative interfaces to meet these needs, whether pre-constructed, adapted or constructed on the fly, are a form of personalization.

Another rapidly emerging segment of technology is that of pervasive computing, whereby intelligent devices of all sorts are distributed into the living environments of home, shopping, and other activities involving mobile systems. Of particular note are the numerous offerings in:

  • Unified messaging/mobile computing (eFax, Hotmail), providing a central information net-access point for one's messaging needs;
  • Net-based information stores for people's core documents/pictures (Freespace, Apple iTools);
  • Transcoding/reformatting services for various devices (Everypath, YahooMobile, IBM);
  • Home automation & multi-access point management (Sony, Echelon, Microsoft, IBM)
  • Personalization of content & related marketing data (Vignette, NetPerceptions)

This follows the burgeoning of wireless technology from companies such as Qualcomm, Nokia, Ericsson, and Motorola, to mention but a few, as well as activities such as the Wireless Application Protocol Forum (WAPForum) and the Salutation Consortium in promoting applications for wireless devices.  Handheld devices such as the 3Com Palm and the Pocket PC are targeted at the mobile computing environment.  Another important factor in the wireless environment is the Bluetooth RF infrastructure for which a very substantial number of manufacturers are building compatible devices.

Whereas these services look towards increasing access for user's critical information, they rely on end-users to configure, change, or maintain configurations for their access.    In addition, the burden of incorporating multiples of these offerings into a daily regimen is taxing on the user, and certainly highly error-prone.  The key shortfall, however, rests in the personalization of the user's interaction with each of these separate systems, and the changes and dynamics that individual users' will need to effectively coordinate and use these services effectively.  This can be made especially difficult for a user with a disability or who is aging.

To make these systems truly usable, service providers must bridge the user's networks (office, mobile, home); the user's devices (phone, web-pad, computer); and the user's information spaces (email, documents, news/information).

Key to interaction across devices and information spaces is the ability to provide the solution in a ubiquitous form factor.  Two related initiatives are needed:

  • Spreading the user preference initiators throughout devices and information systems via involvement by system-on-a-chip manufacturers, device manufacturers, and mobile code technology.
  • Appending additional services onto application servers or platforms to provide a richer, personalized user experience.

Moreover, there is an abundant market for third-party developers to build products that will carry out interface transformations for content, appearance and user controls and to build applications that lend themselves to interface selection or transformation.  Many of these already exist.  Netscape has released its Versions 6 browser which permits widespread modification of both its operating interface and the content appearing on it, through a language called XUL (extensible User interface Language).  There is also another language called User Interface Markup Language that uses Sun Microsystems’ Java Swing for modifying rendering of interface elements.  Both of these languages are compatible with and expressible by the W3C language XML.  Sun is also pushing its Jini connection technology as a means of mediating access to alternative interfaces (the proposed standards would run over Jini).  Other venues for the standard include the Salutation Consortium’s Salutation architecture, HomeAPI/Universal Plug and Play, and other home networking technologies.

3.3.3 Costs and Methods for Conformity Assessment
The document will contain requirements for conformity pertaining to each component of the standard. These requirements can be used to test conformance with the standard.

Conformance will be determined by industry interoperability testing methods.  The costs for such testing will be born by the component (URC or Target) developer or manufacturer.
 
3.3.4 Return on Investment
The return on investment for this development is expected to be high, due to the complexity and cost to individuals and their employing organizations of  using the current methods of interface configuration in the areas covered by the proposed Standard.

3.4 Legal Considerations

 

3.4.1 Patent Assertions
Calls have been made to identify assertions of patent rights in accordance with the relevant INCITS, ANSI and ISO/IEC policies and procedures. At this time, INCITS/V2 members are unaware of any patent assertions that may be made.

3.4.2 Dissemination of the Standard or Technical Report
Drafts of this document will be disseminated electronically. Dissemination of the final Standard will be restricted as the document becomes the property of INCITS, ANSI, or ISO/IEC.

4. Related Standards Activities

4.1 Existing Standards
There are no known protocols at the Human Computer Interface.

4.2 Related Standards Activity

HFES
ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC 35 User Interfaces


Note: as the U.S. TAG to ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC 35 User Interfaces, INCITS/V2 will be working closely with the International community to ensure the broadest possible acceptance of the standards.  We intend to submit a parallel NP for development of a multipart ISO/IEC International Standard.


4.3 Recommendations for Close Liaison

W3C/WAI Protocols and Formats WG
INCITS/L8
INCITS T4 (security)

UPnP

Jini

Dublin Core Metadata Initiative

W3C RDF Core Working Group
W3C XForms Working Group

5. Units of Measurement used in the Standard
    Not Measurement Sensitive