AW: What to do with WoT Profiles 1.0

Both examples match perfect to the data model as defined in TD1.1. However, it comes to a superset regarding behavior, e.g., the TD1.1 spec says

“A WoT Thing Description MUST accurately describe the data returned and accepted by each interaction”
The TDs examples definitely does not match the answer behavior as shown Example 15<https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#example-15>.

Today, I will reserve some time in the main call (~20min) for this kind of discussion. However, I need to ask the group if this is ok.

BR
Sebastian


Von: Ben Francis <ben@krellian.com>
Datum: Dienstag, 4. Juni 2024 um 20:01
An: Kaebisch, Sebastian (T CED IIS-DE) <sebastian.kaebisch@siemens.com>
Cc: public-wot-wg@w3.org <public-wot-wg@w3.org>
Betreff: Re: What to do with WoT Profiles 1.0


On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 at 18:47, Ben Francis <ben@krellian.com<mailto:ben@krellian.com>> wrote:
Actually the Thing Descriptions of profile-compliant Things are a subset of the TD 1.1 specification, at least with the current set of profiles. They have been carefully designed such that a Consumer which does not implement a given profile will just fall back to the defaults in the protocol binding template and the Thing will still behave as the Consumer expects.

BTW, if you are not convinced about this, please take a look at the Example 4<https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#example-4> and Example 23<https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#example-23> Thing Descriptions from the WoT Profile specification and tell me:

  *   Which parts of the Thing Descriptions are a superset of TD 1.1
  *   Which affordances would confuse a generic TD 1.1 Consumer