Re: Representative sample of industry protocols

Just to clarfiy: absolutely with you David, we never meant to propose the
extension at the product level only, the product schema.org format was just
picked as an example. We meant to support *any* extension via JSON-LD.

Dom

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:58 AM David Janes <davidjanes@davidjanes.com>
wrote:

> I agree with Dominique that (paraphrasing) use JSON and then add semantics
> via JSON-LD describing that JSON. However, EVRYTHNG's proposed semantic
> extensions are (currently) at the "product level" rather than the actuator
> / sensor level.
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/Submission/2015/SUBM-wot-model-20150824/#semantic-extensions
>
> {
>     "name": "Beaglebone Black",
>     "description": "A Beaglebone Black embedded device",
>     "productID" : "asin:B00CO3MZCW",
>     "manufacturer" : "Beagleboard", ...
> }
>
> What one really needs for interoperability is JSON-LD to describe the data
> e.g. here
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/Submission/2015/SUBM-wot-model-20150824/#update-a-specific-property
>
> [
>   {
>     "temp":24
>   }
> ]
>
> What does "temp" mean - is it celsius, fahrenheit, is it ranged, what is
> its precision and so forth?
>
> The beautiful thing about JSON-LD is that we can keep ad-hoc JSON as the
> payload (that is, we don't have to standardize the word "temp") but still
> have an exact model of how this works.
>
> This slideshare outlines a way this could be done:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/dpjanes/semantic-and-the-internet-of-things
>
> Or if something like this in JSON-LD (which if you squint a little could
> probably drop on top of EVRYTHNG's proposed semantic extensions)
>
>
> https://github.com/dpjanes/homestar-smartthings/blob/master/models/smart-things-temperature/model.json
>
> Regards,
> David
>
>
>
> Regards, etc...
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Dominique Guinard <dom@evrythng.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think one way would indeed be to prioritize the work on HTTP and
> Websockets as we were suggesting in the Web Thing model (
> http://model.webofthings.io): HTTP because it is simply the ubiquitous
> protocol of the Web, Websocket because it represents a way to deal with the
> event-driven real-world supported by a very large number of clients (and
> servers). We use Websocket to that aim for years now, we also use MQTT over
> Websocket which is pretty easy to achieve and can happen all in the browser
> (as both protocols use TCP). In terms of understanding the content of WS
> frames there is a standard way of doing so using the Websocket subprotocol
> field (see https://www.iana.org/assignments/websocket/websocket.xml).
>
> Then of course JSON is the interop data format on the Web with the ability
> through content-negotiation to use a binary protocol (e.g., messagepack,
> etc.) and the open door to the Semantic Web via  JSON-LD extensions (
> https://www.w3.org/Submission/2015/SUBM-wot-model-20150824/#semantic-extensions)
> but I would not make it mandatory: there is a lot of interoperability value
> in supporting plain old JSON with a basic agreed upon model.
>
> I think this a trend you can observe in many places. Back 10 years ago not
> that many Things protocols were considering the Internet, let alone the
> Web. Today however things have changed. Weave is building on HTTP and JSON,
> homekit likewise, EnOcean support HTTP at the gateway level, Bluetooth has
> a GATT REST API and even Bacnet apparently will support RESTful services:
> the IoT is finally getting on the Internet and Web protocols seems to be
> the place where the convergence happens defacto, creating a uniform
> application layer. However, the semantics of interactions, resources and
> payloads structure is not uniform yet. This to me is the Web of Things and
> where this group should contribute.
>
> As a side note: the role of HTTP/2 in the IoT for me is also important to
> call out: and HTTP/2 will be much more suitable for embedded devices
> brining some of the goodness of protocols like CoAP and MQTT to a larger
> Web: header compression, binary protocol, serverpush, multiplexing (see
> e.g., http://webofthings.org/2015/10/25/http2-for-internet-of-things-1/).
>
> Dom
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 9:50 AM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Ben,
>
>
>
> I am hearing strong agreement about the value of HTTP as a very popular
> Internet protocol, but not so much about the impact of different
> application domain requirements on the communication patterns. HTTP itself
> can be used in many different ways, and this can lead to interoperability
> challenges. It thus makes sense to identify design patterns for common sets
> of requirements based upon an agreed set of use cases. We can then define
> the metadata vocabulary for declaring how a particular platform is using
> the protocol, as a means to enable interoperability. The Interest Group has
> already done quite a bit of work on this, albeit on a restricted set of use
> cases.
>
> Whilst we can prioritize work on HTTP, we shouldn’t preclude work on other
> protocols, as according to the level of interest amongst the group
> participants. The Interest Group, for instance, has worked on CoAP.
>
> In respect to WebSockets, people tend to roll their own (proprietary)
> protocol using JSON messages. Interoperability would require work on
> standards for these messages. This seems like something that needs further
> incubation to ensure the appropriate level of critical review.
>
> p.s. this is of course just my personal opinion.
>
> —
>    Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Dominique Guinard, Ph.D. ////
> co-founder & chief technology officer
> +44 79 5153 2987 // w evrythng.com
> t @domguinard // w guinard.org
> b webofthings.org
>
> About EVRYTHNG: http://bit.ly/smarterIoT
> Book: Building the Web of Things: http://bit.ly/wotbook
> Bloomberg Innovation Leader 2016: http://bit.ly/1OHR7k7
> RedHerring Top 100 2016: http://bit.ly/1WbIF4t
> 10-billion Products Born Digital: http://bit.ly/1SUHiSN
>
>
> --
--
Dominique Guinard, Ph.D. ////
co-founder & chief technology officer
+44 79 5153 2987 // w evrythng.com
t @domguinard // w guinard.org
b webofthings.org

About EVRYTHNG: http://bit.ly/smarterIoT
Book: Building the Web of Things: http://bit.ly/wotbook
Bloomberg Innovation Leader 2016: http://bit.ly/1OHR7k7
RedHerring Top 100 2016: http://bit.ly/1WbIF4t
10-billion Products Born Digital: http://bit.ly/1SUHiSN