Options for the nature of openMobility:
a) openMobility is a place to build and start a community around the topics mobility (no Budget, almost no infrastructure, no program plan, …)
b) openMobility should be a place to specifically work towards a common goal (with a program plan, a dedicated budget, …)
c) …
Jakob: could be challenging to commit to common goals for the entire working group (diverse community in openMobility - industry and academia); budget could be challenging as well; situation would change, if we get a major industry partner from the traffic domain (like Swarco, …) to become a member in openMobility
Robert+Karl: initial expection of having paying industry partner members did not realize; interested in visibility and joint research with MOSAIC and SUMO
A. Graf: moving the talks to Eclipse SUMO project would be ok for him
There is no lack of topics to discuss among the members of openMobility - but maybe not enough for a majority of all group members?
Options to proceed:
A) Build a program plan with minimal effort (based on OpenADx template)
B) Do not do a program plan, but try to establish openMobility as a vendor-neutral meeting point (working group “light”)
C) Shutdown openMobility and meet as part of Eclipse SUMO or Automotive TLP
D) Potentially fusion with other Automotive Working Groups (e.g. OpenADx or new Working Groups)
Next steps: Robert calls Michael Plagge to discuss these options
