Re: [generic-sensor] Questions on the draft Generic Sensor API

Hi Carl,

Thanks for sharing this extensive update on geospatially enabled sensors being worked on in the OGC. Also thanks for your comments and questions regarding the Generic Sensor API.

To ensure your comments and questions are appropriately considered and reach the right audience, I'd ask you to file them as new issues via https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues -- this WG nowadays conducts its technical work fully in GitHub and this mailing list is only used for announcements and meetings logistics.

With my chair hat on, as a high-level comment regarding alignment, my understanding is the OGC defines RESTful APIs, while this W3C WG develops JavaScript APIs. This somewhat limits the alignment potential between the two efforts. As a concrete example, W3C specifications describe their interfaces using Web IDL (https://webidl.spec.whatwg.org/).

There are definitely areas where our interests are shared. One example would be high-level security and privacy considerations that span across the two.

As I noted in the GH issue, I suggest you also reach out to the Web of Things WG that has established a formal coordination with OGC for SensorThings API and location metadata (https://www.w3.org/2020/01/wot-wg-charter.html#coordination).

Looking forward to continuing discussion in the Generic Sensor API GH issues. Please also feel free to share your suggested use cases via GH issues involving SensorThings and Generic Sensor API.

Thanks,

-Anssi (W3C Devices and Sensors WG co-chair)

On 1. Jan 2022, at 19.42, Carl Reed <carl.n.reed@gmail.com<mailto:carl.n.reed@gmail.com>> wrote:

To Whom it May Concern -

The Open GeoSpatial Consortium (OGC) and W3C have a long and strong history of collaboration. The following is submitted in the spirit of this collaboration and by way of context.

Since 2000, the OGC Membership has been working on and deploying a range of standards for accessing, tasking, describing, and sharing geospatially enabled sensors. The sensor types range from satellites to IoT accessible devices and includes both dynamic and in-situ sensors and actuators. (see https://www.ogc.org/node/698). At the heart of these standards is an ISO Standard  typically referred to as Observations and Measurements( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observations_and_Measurements)

One of the most recent additions to the suite of OGC sensor focused standards is
SensorThings API Part 1: Sensing Version 1.1 (https://docs.ogc.org/is/18-088/18-088.html)

The OGC SensorThings API provides an open, geospatial-enabled and unified way to interconnect the Internet of Things (IoT) devices, data, and applications over the web. At a high level the OGC SensorThings API provides two main functionalities and each function is handled by a part. The two parts are the Sensing part and the Tasking part. The Sensing part provides a standard way to manage and retrieve observations and metadata from heterogeneous IoT sensor systems.

Another OGC activity that might be of interest is the current OGC GeoPose standards work. The draft OGC GeoPose standard describes an interoperable way to express, record, and share the position and orientation of objects across diverse applications, users, devices, services, and platforms.

A comment: I really like and appreciate the section on privacy and security. I believe that the OGC SensorThings standards group will also be very interested in those sections of the document.

A comment: Minor, but I think that in the Scope you should be even more clear as to the focus of the Generic API. For example, I suspect many in the geospatial community would categorize real time imagery (including video) collected from say a drone is using a device sensor.

A question: Have you considered datastreams?

An observation: There are definitely terminology differences between what is used in the Generic API and what is used in ISO TC211 and the OGC. For example, tasking in the OGC world includes concepts such as tasking a satellite or a drone. While the terminology may be conceptually the same at an abstract level, having a crosswalk between the W3C Generic API work and OGC SensorThings (and other OGC sensor standards) might be useful for the broader community.

A thought: I think that it might be very interesting and beneficial to consider how SensorThings and the Generic API align and could perhaps work together in certain use cases and or work/flows.

Happy New Year!

Cheers

Carl Reed, PhD
Former Standards Director and CTO, OGC
--

Mobile: 970-402-0284

“A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it is not open.”

— Frank Zappa

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

— Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Founding Father