Re: Request for comments: Draft W3C Web of Things Interest Group Charter

(FYI, accidentally took this off-list. Any thoughts? Kind regards, Thomas)

On 25 Sep 2014, at 20:02, Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> 
> On 2014-09-25 06:49, Thomas Amberg wrote:
>> Hi Wayne,
>> 
>> here is a simple definition of IoT / WoT by Cuno Pfister, from his book "Getting Started with the Internet of Things":
>> 
>> "The Internet of Things is a global network of computers, sensors and actuators connected through Internet protocols."
>> 
>> "The Web of Things consists of RESTful Web services that measure or manipulate physical properties."
> 
> I think what W3C would be looking at wouldn't be that restricted. e.g. not just REST. (WebSockets, JSON, maybe JavaScript APIs for use in gateways (completely unrelated to IP networks).  Metadata for services or data unrelated to IP networks.  Maybe scripting APIs for use in gateways where those aren't being done by any other org. Generally, anything based on some W3C technology.  They could want to get into APIs for JavaScript (node.js) regardless of whether the use is IP based (JavaScript APIs for node.js event model systems, or branching out to Python or Lua).
> 
> I think on the Internet side, I think people think of the Internet of Things more broadly than just things connected through Internet protocols.  They may touch the Internet at some point, but most of it could be other networks.
> 
>> 
>> http://www.gsiot.info/internet-of-things/
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Thomas
>> 
>> 
>> On 25 Sep 2014, at 02:11, Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2014-09-24 10:21, Dave Raggett wrote:
>>>> On 24/09/14 17:39, Tran, Dzung D wrote:
>>>>> Dave,
>>>>> 
>>>>>    Quick review, I see that there are reference to 'IoT' and Web of
>>>>> Things, can we get definitions for these two terms?
>>>> The terms are explained in the workshop materials and the draft charter.
>>> I find the name confusing as well, though I'm not sure it matters. When I refer to the Workshop or this proposed Interest Group inside the company I work for, I typically describe the WoT as whatever part of IoT that W3C winds up working on (and the workshop and IG as steps in figuring out what that is).
>>> 
>>> JavaScript, JSON, HTTP, RESTful services APIs, Web Sockets (with things providing servers to access their services or using services in the cloud or gateway) or using Browsers as a universal way to access things in the local network already seems a part of the Internet of Things.  Are those examples of the Web of Things?  Is local discovery of services using some wireless protocol IoT, but local discovery using RESTful web services WoT?
>>> 
>>> People already get confused about the Internet vs. the Web.  Then we get the Internet of Things and Web of Things, where now "Internet" doesn't mean Internet protocols anymore, but rather an analogy, and Web of Things is something on top of that :)
>>> 
>>> I think the WoT name is OK because it could be something will develop that clearly is a Web of Things.  But, for now I think there will be some confusion.  If there's a simple definition it would be good to include it.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>>    Under requirements, what does 'Bridging the gap between Web of Things
>>>>> and IoT' mean? Unless we have clear definitions for both of these terms
>>>>> above, we can't determine the gap.
>>>> Consider the need for connecting web based service platforms to devices using IoT protocols.  There is a long list of such protocols, and these are likely to keep evolving. As an example consider KNX for intelligent buildings.  A gateway could be used to expose data from  building sensors using KNX to access the sensors and HTTP to expose the data to Web based services.
>>> So when device reads a sensor that is part of the device itself and then reports data to the cloud using http, that reporting part is part of the WoT?  And the device itself is part of the IoT?  I'm trying to understand the layering on top of as opposed to is part of relationship.   It seems to me for these simple cases at least, the whole thing people would see as IoT (with a Web component of that).
>>> 
>>>>>    Also under requirements, it mentioned 'Monetization', why would a w3c
>>>>> group determines the strategy and how to monetization?
>>>> Developers of services will in many cases seek to monetize their work.  W3C held a workshop on payments in Paris earlier this year, and is now planning on launching  Payments Interest Group. The Web of Things Interest Group would look at the use cases and requirements for open markets of services and coordinate with the Payments Interest Group on identifying specific opportunities for standardization.
>>> I think "monitization" often means developing a business strategy for generating profits from something that currently isn't a source of profit (or not enough).  So I think it could be read in the Charter as developing business strategies for how to make money rather than to define requirements related to arranging payments. Once someone had some strategy for monitization, it could lead to requirements for some particular standards, like counting sensor accesses or sharing information, but someone else would be figuring out their monitization strategies outside the IG and bring back use cases for some technical capability.
>>> 
>>> I'd change that line to something like: "Payments in the IoT context"
>>> 
>>>> Many thanks for your questions.
>>>> 
>>> 
>

Received on Saturday, 27 September 2014 09:25:59 UTC