Re: Representative sample of industry protocols from Benjamin Francis on 2016-10-26 (public-wot-ig@w3.org from October 2016)

From: Benjamin Francis <bfrancis@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:44:42 +0100
To: David Janes <davidjanes@davidjanes.com>
Cc: Dominique Guinard <dom@evrythng.com>, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>, "Kovatsch, Matthias" <matthias.kovatsch@siemens.com>, public-wot-ig <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAKQmVV8kigsdfQbT=3Oo4EqXRJs7sdwcfxGAPukG+OBNBinMzA@mail.gmail.com>

On 26 October 2016 at 11:57, 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.
>

See also David's parallel thread on the Schema.org IoT list
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sdo-iot-sync/SO0ineFpygQ/fG48wr_vBAAJ

Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2016 11:45:22 UTC