RE: Bootstrapping the Web of Things Community Group

Just a word of caution: most real world IOT deployments we deal with don’t
even use IP.



Look at weightless, or the innumerable RF 868/463 deployments in existence.
There are hard physics reasons why this is the case.



Within the subset of IOT devices that use IP (TCP or UDP) – CoAP is one of
several alternatives



IMHO a W3C WoT initiative should be inclusive, and implement the
appropriate functional abstractions to help web developers navigate the
multiplicity of implementations already in existence.



I think there is merit in looking at
http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html as prior art in this space. It
is:



-       Functional developer level abstraction

-       Lends itself to many physical implementations

-       Is in reality: web friendly access to a “sensor”

-       Encapsulates the security privacy issue – albeit not adequately
addressed at present



Just an opinion





Nick













*From:* Xiang Su [mailto:xiang.su@ee.oulu.fi]
*Sent:* 22 January 2014 12:07
*To:* Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com; dsr@w3.org; public-web-of-things@w3.org
*Subject:* Re: Bootstrapping the Web of Things Community Group



Hi,

I agree with Markus that Coap is clearly cornerstone for WoT. This is
already standardized by IETF, we should always try to use ready
standardized work  when possible in development of WoT apps.

What more we could do in this group? The general version of "Web of things"
is to reuse/adapt web technologies for building application and services
for "things". While underlying communication issues are being solved, it's
important to think about how to realize full potential of Web technologies.
integrating and interoperating huge amounts of information provided by
things is important.

It's interesting to study best ways to adapt Web architecture principles,
protocols, identifications, meta formats, etc for WoT. OGC SensorThings API
is an important effort, and new W3C recommendation JSON-LD (
http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-json-ld-20140116/) is also an interesting
format for WoT.

Another thing is semantics, how to enable sensors/actuators as data sources
of linked data is a challenge. Can ready W3C languages, including OWL
ontologies, SPARQL, RIF or SWRL reasoning languages be used in WoT
straightforwardly? We need to think how to take benefits from these.

Moreover, it important to enjoy the benefit of Web technologies and
semantics, without breaking the constraints on resource usage. In our
group, we also study resource consumptions, e.g. usage of processor,
memory, bandwidth, and energy in WoT applications.

br,
-Xiang

On 20.1.2014 15:39, Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com wrote:

Hi Dave,



One very “Web of Things” oriented effort, that I have not seen mentioned on
this list before, is the standardization of the Constrained Application
Protocol (CoAP) in the IETF, see
http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/core/charter/ and
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-coap/.



CoAP is an application protocol that supports the RESTful CRUD methods
similar to HTTP (in practice GET, PUT, DELETE and POST), but in a more
lightweight manner. For instance, it runs over UDP (and DTLS for security),
and is binary encoded. In addition to the baseline protocol, some of the
related infrastructure, such as resource directories, mirror proxies etc.
are being standardized. The idea is that CoAP is so compact, that it fits
nicely on top of IP even on the most constrained radio links, such as
Zigbee or Bluetooth Low Energy. Otherwise all the normal Web design
principles apply.



I don’t know how far the Community Group effort will go, but it would be
certainly interesting to get CoAP JS API standardized, so that it could be
supported in browsers or web apps, for instance.



You can find the contact details of the active CoAP people from the CoRE WG
pages, including chairs and draft authors. Carsten Bormann, Cullen Jennings
(WG chairs) and Zach Shelby (base protocol main author) good candidates,
for instance.



There is also IP for Smart Objects (IPSO) Alliance,
http://www.ipso-alliance.org/, an industry group dedicated to the promotion
of IP/Internet and Web technologies for “smart objects”. Geoff Mulligan is
the chair.



Regards,

                Markus





*From:* ext Dave Raggett [mailto:dsr@w3.org <dsr@w3.org>]
*Sent:* 17 January, 2014 18:54
*To:* public-web-of-things@w3.org
*Subject:* Bootstrapping the Web of Things Community Group



The group has been very quiet until now, and I would like to get things
moving, especially, as we want your help with the planning the W3C Web of
Things Workshop to be held this June somewhere in Europe.  The dates and
location are still to be decided. Please let us have your ideas!



The aim of the workshop will be to discuss opportunities for
standardization as a basis for interoperability and a thriving ecosystem.
To support that we will be looking for examples of use cases, and analyses
of requirements and architectures, as well as implementation experiences.
Please help us to frame the scope of the workshop in more detail.

Which people/organizations should we invite to become part of the
workshop's program committee?

Send your comments to the Web of Things Community Group mailing list

 *  public-web-of-things@w3.org

Please note that note that everyone on the older list (public-wot) have
been moved over to the above list. Newcomers to the Web of Things Community
Group will be automatically subscribed to the above mailing list.

Looking forward to working with you all.

-- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett