Meeting Location: This meeting was hosted by the Trace Research and Development Center, 2107 Engineering Centers Building, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Meeting Dates:

1. Call to Order

Bill LaPlant, V2 Chair, called the meeting to order and welcomed the members and guests.

2. Introduction of attendees

Ref:

V2 members

Liaisons

Observers and guests

3. Approval of the Agenda

Ref:

The agenda, without modifications, was approved by unanimous consent. See attached final agenda.

4. Approval of the Minutes for plenary meeting #12

Ref:

Roeder said the minutes for plenary #12 are delayed. The approval of the minutes for plenary #12 will be added to the agenda for the next plenary.

5. Review of action items

Ref:

The action items were deferred and not taken up again during this plenary.

6. Administrative Reports

6.1 Officer Remarks

6.1.1 Chair

6.1.1.1 Call for Chairman

Applications for Chair of INCITS-V2 are due by October 9, 2003. LaPlant said he has reapplied for the position.

6.1.1.2 Approval of Draft Annual Report

Ref:

V2/03-0070 - Slide Presentation to NCITS on V2, 10/2003

LaPlant thanked Haritos-Shea and Gilman for their comments on the draft report. He asked that any other comments be sent by email by the end of this plenary. Barring other comments, the report as posted will be sent to INCITS.

6.1.2 Vice Chair

Haritos-Shea said she has some comments on where we are in the standards process but deferred them until discussions later in the plenary.  See agenda item 6.4 INCITS Training.

6.1.3 International Representative

Ref:

Zimmermann gave a report on recent SC35 activities.

VIEW slides of IR report presented at plenary #13, 10/7-9/2003

There was discussion on how the international subcommittees operate and on how V2 will interface with SC35.LaPlant noted that V2 is assigned as TAG to WG6 and that the chair of SC35 suggested the activity of V2 might be better suited to a different WG.

Zimmermann, LaPlant and Price will attend the SC35 plenary in Paris in December as part of the U.S. delegation.

MOTION: (laPlant, Price) that the U.S. TAG to SC35 nominates Gottfried Zimmermann as head of the delegation to the ISO IEC JTC1 SC35 plenary in Paris.

Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

6.1.4 Secretary

Roeder reported that a quorum was present.

Roeder reported on a conversation with Ward Bond of Talking Signs.  Their product communicates in one direction, broadcasting from the sign to personal receivers. However, they are looking at using internet connections to obtain language translations.  They discussed the possibility of using  the resources part of the V2 protocol for this.  Mr. Bond said a delegation from the consortium supporting Talking Signs, would be in the U.S. in October and might want to meet in Washington, DC, on the 29th to learn more about V2.  LaPlant and Sheppard will meet them at NIST for a brief presentation on V2 and on the Smart Space project.

6.2 Roll Call of Members in Jeopardy Due to Failure to Attend Meetings

LaPlant said he has not sent out any warning letters to members in jeopardy and will do so before the next plenary.

6.3 New member recruiting

LaPlant said mew member recruiting is ongoing. He encouraged V2 members to give the web site address to any potential new members and to refer them to any V2 officer.

6.4 INCITS Training

Ref:

Haritos-Shea reviewed the elements of the INCITS training and will ask INCITS if this meets their requirements for TC member training

VIEW slides of Vice Chair report and INCITS training presented at plenary #13

7. U.S. TAG to ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC 35 User Interfaces Sub Committee

Ref:

7.1 U.S. TAG to ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC35 WG6 User Interfaces For People With Special Needs - Including The Elderly And Disabled Working Group

See the IR report in agenda item 6.1.3.Zimmermann asked if we needed a resolution on how we would contribute to this survey and LaPlant said a resolution is not necessary.

7.2 ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC36 Information Technology for Learning, Education, and Training

ref:

No report.

7.3 ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC25 WG1 Home Electronic Systems

Ref:

LaPlant said this group is doing a gateway protocol above all the different home based technologies such as Bluetooth, HAVI, etc.  Farance is editor of the core standards for this group and has indicated that the human interface element is missing.

Zimmermann looked briefly at their standard and said his impression was that it is aimed at supporting interoperability between different home networking technologies more on the level of discovery and services connection than just transport.  He said this might be used in the gateway to translate between different networks on the lowest common denominators but will not handle items unique to a particular networking technology.  Consequently, it is probably not helpful for implementing V2 on a particular technology such as UP&P.

As for the human interface component missing in the standard, V2 needs to do more work on their own standard.  This topic may be revisited later.

7.4 ISO TC 154 (Ergonomics) & ISO TC 176 (AT).

No report.

8. Review of Related Activities.

8.1 Web Accessibility Initiative.

Ref:

No report.  Haritos-Shea asked that this topic be expanded to cover web accessibility issues beyond WAI.  LaPlant said this agenda item will be renamed W3C.

8.2 IEEE P1621 Standard for User Interface Elements in Power Control of Electronic Devices Employed in Office/Consumer Environments.

Ref:

LaPlant said this item will be dropped.

8.3 Accessibility Forum.

Ref:

Vanderheiden said that the recent meeting was more of a discussion and briefing session for government participants.  GSA asked the forum staff to develop a tool for evaluating a product's applicability to the section 508 standard.  There will be an announcement on whether funding will be allocated to continue the Forum.

8.4 Access Board Proposed Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards.

Ref:

Vanderheiden said the Access Board staff will be responding to comments from the Access Forum.

8.5 Universal Plug and Play Forum.

Ref:

Price said we need to re-engage with UP&P on what V2 is doing, probably at their next meeting after the November meeting.  Zimmermann proposed that we solicit feedback on our draft documents from outside experts, including Toby Nixon, our contact for  UP&P, and Mark Walker, chair of the UP&P remote IO working group.

Price asked that an agenda item be added for a discussion of presentations at conferences.  LaPlant added "12.1

Conferences and/or Submissions" and asked Price to lead an overnight ad hoc to develop proposals for consideration.

8.6 Other.

8.6.1 Metadata.

8.6.1.1 Dublin Core.

Ref:

Zimmermann and Nevile discussed the presentation made at DCMI2003.

VIEW slides of Smart Metadata For

Zimmermann gave a presentation on the Trace prototype.

VIEW slides of Trace Prototyping presented at plenary #13

9.1.2 NIST Smart Space Prototype.

Ref:

Roucoux gave a presentation on the NIST prototype.  See the "slides of NIST prototype demo presented at plenary #13".

9.2 Ad hoc task group reports.

9.2.1 V2A - AIAP-URC Editing.

Ref:

Zimmermann presented a V2A report on the status of the draft AIAP-URC documents.

VIEW slides of V2A report presented at plenary #13

9.2.2 V2E - Editing & Web Sites Status.

No report.

9.2.3 V2G - Glossary/scenarios.

No report

9.2.4 V2M - Metadata.

See 8.6.1 Metadata.

9.2.5 V2.1 - Security.

Haritos-Shea furnished the following notes from the Security Scenario breakout session.

• 3 Scenarios to be used:
  1. ATM
  2. Building Access to Secure (unmanned) Facility
  3. Touring Test (refer to W3C PF doc)
• Web bot determinations
• Stereo
• Credit Card Purchase

Issues Identified that need to be specifically addressed:

1. Controlling Access (by others) to Your Own Personal Targets
2. Security Data String Along the URC/Target Tunnel
3. Session Highjacking
4. Secure Access to Biometric Profile
5. Protection of Network Resources
6. Identification

Gilman furnished the following reference:

OASIS Web Services Security TC

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wss

10. Discussion of Tasks and Priorities.

10.1 Working Sessions.

There was discussion on some open issue hurdles that needed resolution in order to move onto the public comment phase.

One hurdle involved terminology and the use of "core" was discussed extensively. The consensus was to use "core" only in refering to components required for compliance with the standard. Core components may be spread over more than one document.

Another hurdle was on whether there needed to be a core language for core information presentation elements like labels and help text. The concern was that naming "english" as a core language might alienate some countries, while allowing any natural language might prevent use by smaller countries if there was no translation service from their language to the language used in the core information presentation elements. This discussion ended on a concensus to remove the phrase "such as english" from the pertinant parts of the draft document and let market

 Zimmermann initiated a discussion on the disposition of the lists of open and closed issues. The concern is how to bring the issues forward for the new architecture and how to manage the work.

MOTION (Vanderheiden, Haritos-Shea) that V2A walk the old list of closed issues and resurrect any items that have reopened due to the new architecture. V2A take old issues closed list resurrect any items reopened due to new architecture.

Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

MOTION (Zimmermann, Vanderheiden) that the conceptual and architectural decisions outlined in the current draft working documents, including the resolutions of the plenary #13, are frozen for the public review draft of AIAP-URC 1.0, except for the purpose of fixing very severe flaws. Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

MOTION (Zimmermann, Vanderheiden) that the chairs of V2a have permission to authorize the distribution of the current draft documents, or its successor documents as edited by V2A, to outside experts. An appropriate way to promote control circulation to just the experts and to notify the V2 officers of the recipients will be used.

Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

MOTION (Haritos-Shea, Price) to reestablish the ad hocs, with the existing chairs, V2A, V2M, V2S and V2E.

Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

MOTION (laPlant, Vanderheiden) that V2 reestablish V2C with the authority to act on behalf of the plenary and chaired by the chairman of V2. Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

MOTION (Vanderheiden, Roeder) that V2 establish ad hoc V2p -Disemination and Promotion, chaired by Vanderheiden, to develop a plan, a strategy and targets to diseminate information, promote and further the acceptance and implementation of the AIAP standard. Without objection Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

Sajka, Price, Hofstader, Roeder Sheppard and LaPlant volunteered to join V2P. The first conference call for V2P will be at 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM (ET) on October 16, 2004.

11. Pending Items.

11.1 Planning for Implementors' Workshop.

There was discussion about guidelines or additional documents to show how to implement the V2 standards with particular networking technologies. Such documents might be developed by V2 (as new projects for technical reports), by a network technology consortium or by others. Gilman noted that if there are partss of an implementation that need to be done in a particular way to support the standards, then any document defining what should be done should be on a level with the standard. One purpose of the prototype effort has been to separate what is needed from what is optional.

Vanderheiden suggested documents for the optional items should be called implementations resources. He said guidelines are like soft standards and should be done carefully and reviewed. LaPlant noted that standards are often promoted by third party publications that offer example implementations and toolkits.

Zimmermann was concerned about the work needed for creating such materials and said we need guidelines to ensure interoperability. There would be advantages to letting a consortium take this on and LaPlant cautioned that there are IPR issues involved. Vanderheiden suggested we could publish notes and sample code from the prototype implementations. This could stimulate interest and encourage feedback.

Zimmermann summarized the discussion with these points:

• implementation guidelines should come from networking technology communities, not V2
• V2 members building prototypes for diferent platforms should document and share their notes with networking communities and ask for feedback
• members of the networking communities should be invited to join V2

11.2 V2 Web Site.

No report.

12. New Items.

12.1 Conferences and/or Submissions.

Ref:

A paper will be submitted for CSUN. Other conferencess were discussed for possible V2 promotions.

13. Future Meetings.

MOTION (Haritos-Shea, Price) that V2 adopts the following schedule for 2004:

• Plenary #14 will be on January 12-13, 2004, at NIST in Gaithersburg or at Georgia Tech in Atlanta,
• Plenary #15 will be on March 15-16, 2004, and colocated at the CSUN conference in LosAngeles,
• Plenary #16 will be in June or July in the DC area,
• Plenary #17 will be in October, 2004, at Trace in Madison.

Without objection the motion passed by unanimous consent.

The next V2C conference call will be 1:00-3:00 PM (ET) on October 23, 2004.

14. Summary of Action Items.

Ref: