W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-ig@w3.org > January 2016

Re: [T2TRG] 3. WoT Thing needs to have meta Band

From: David Janes <davidjanes@davidjanes.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:42:03 -0500
Message-ID: <CACp1KyPrLtMQbYEsQ4Kbmgd+H9kG5OjB-6rAMyHEM2juZHLUKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: "Lynn, James (Application Defender / Fortify on Demand)" <james.lynn@hpe.com>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, "public-wot-ig@w3.org" <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, "t2trg@irtf.org" <t2TRG@irtf.org>
My take is that is something says it's "iot-facet:climate.heating" then
it's worth "looking at" to heat the environment.

How you would tell it to heat the environment is figured out by
introspecting what it does. This isn't so problematic as it sounds: there's
only so many ways it can actually do that.

More generally -- even if you don't like that specific example -- I believe
the concept of "facets declares what it is", "properties declare how it
does it" is a strong, flexible model. And very very future friendly.

D.


On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> "Lynn, James (Application Defender / Fortify on Demand)" wrote:
>     > Can you clarify something regarding this example?
>
>     > A ‘real’ heater typically has a thermostat which can be set to some
>
> I disagree on your definition of "real" :-)
>
> Baseboard heaters for instance are either on or off.
> Water radiators have valves with different settings (other than on/off),
> but
> also are controlled by thermostats, sometimes many of them in the room, and
> usually with a safety to turn things off.
>
> The thermostat is in the room (or sometimes just the house!), and we have
> reason to believe that in the future we'll want more detailed control over
> the heaters...
>
> So my take is that *heaters* do not have a thermostat, but rather a heating
> system or Climate Control system would have that.
>
>     > computer, etc. does not. So they are different ‘types’ of heaters.
> One
>     > proposal seems to be saying it is useful to know that a computer can
> be used
>     > as a heater but not necessary. Another is that ‘things do what they
> say they
>     > do’. Are we proposing that a computer may declare that it is a
> heater?
>
> Not that the computer says it is a heater, but rather, the computer says
> that
> it creates heat.
>
>     > Or perhaps the view is that it really doesn’t matter, it’s outside
> the spec?
>
> I think it matters, but I think it's a question of different facets.
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 28 January 2016 23:42:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 28 January 2016 23:42:51 UTC