New Profile Mechanism section #79

benfrancis · 2021-04-22T15:32:51Z

This PR proposes a new simplified Profile Mechanism section which simply defines a mechanism to denote that a given Web Thing conforms to a particular profile.

As discussed in #73 (comment) and #2

Preview | Diff

benfrancis · 2021-04-22T15:38:19Z

Note: It may make sense to move this section of the WoT Profile specification to the WoT Thing Description specification.

sebastiankb · 2021-04-23T14:31:47Z

index.html

+    {
+      "@context": "https://www.w3.org/2019/wot/td/v1",
+      "id": "urn:dev:ops:32473-WoTLamp-1234",
+      "profile": "https://www.w3.org/2021/wot/profile/core",


profile term does not exist yet, but I would be ok with profile.
w3c/wot-thing-description#806

still we need a good name for "core"

I suggest "Common Profile" #21 (comment)

@sebastiankb: If profile is defined in the Thing Description specification, do you think this section is still needed in the Profile specification? Or should the Profile specification just refer to the relevant section of the Thing Description specification in its introduction for example?

Is anyone working on a PR for w3c/wot-thing-description#806 yet?

yes, I will do it until the next TD meeting. That means we will have it available for the next WD release.

@sebastiankb
Please add a link to the PR that introduces the "profile" identifier in the TD spec to give context.

I've added a link to the definition of the profile member in the TD specification now that has landed.

sebastiankb · 2021-04-23T14:34:25Z

index.html

+    {
+      "@context": "https://www.w3.org/2019/wot/td/v1",
+      "id": "urn:dev:ops:32473-WoTLamp-1234",
+      "profile": [


interesting. +1 to define profile as string and array of strings

Just to be precise, the text above is read as if it should always be an array

@sebastiankb The "array" AND "string" type definition is causing confusion now and then - as in the rest of the profile spec, I suggest to describe single value profile values always as arrays.

@egekorkan Yes sorry that's unclear, I'll work on improving the wording.

@mlagally Given the vast majority of Things are likely to only conform to a single profile, I think that would be wasteful. It's only really complicated if it's not defined from the beginning, which then causes backwards compatibility problems in the future.

@egekorkan OK, I've changed the wording, let me know if that's clearer?

egekorkan · 2021-04-25T21:56:02Z

index.html

+      "id": "urn:dev:ops:32473-WoTLamp-1234",
+      "profile": [
+        "https://www.w3.org/2021/wot/profile/core",
+        "https://www.w3.org/2021/wot/profile/constained"


should be constrained :)

Good catch, fixed.

egekorkan · 2021-04-25T21:57:30Z

index.html

+    {
+      "@context": "https://www.w3.org/2019/wot/td/v1",
+      "id": "urn:dev:ops:32473-WoTLamp-1234",
+      "profile": [


Just to be precise, the text above is read as if it should always be an array

relu91

Like the idea of having a dedicated field to declare profile conformance.

danielpeintner · 2021-04-27T12:09:54Z

I know we have some wildlife but we might consider whether to use singular or plural form (profile vs profiles)

sebastiankb · 2021-05-03T21:45:03Z

index.html

+      <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wot-architecture/#dfn-thing">Web Thing</a>
+      conforms to multiple profiles, its Thing Description
+      [[wot-thing-description]] MUST include a <code>profile</code> member whose
+      value is set to an array of valid profile identifiers corresponding to the


I would suggest a string only for a single profile. An array if multiple profiles are implemented. We have multiple places in the TD for such kind of approach (e.g., security, @type, ...)

This was what I intended to specify, so I need to revisit the wording to make this more clear.

mlagally · 2021-05-05T13:11:23Z

index.html

  <section id="profiling-mechanism">
-    <h2 id="the-profiling-profile">Profiling Mechanism</h2>
+    <h2>Profiling Mechanism</h2>


This MR does not contain a new profile mechanism section and it is not obvious
why the entire profiling mechanism section has been deleted.

Defining a profiling mechanism is part of the requirements for the profile spec,
so deleting this section is not an option.

"profile": "https://www.w3.org/2021/wot/profile/core"

That's the mechanism.

In my opinion this is all that is needed, and even this should probably be moved to the Thing Description specification and just referenced from here.

sebastiankb · 2021-05-05T14:52:51Z

From today's TD call:

we have to clarify how the consumer selects the profile when multiple are provided by the producer.
can a consumer mix profiles?

benfrancis · 2021-05-06T13:58:23Z

we have to clarify how the consumer selects the profile when multiple are provided by the producer.

can a consumer mix profiles?

It's a bit difficult to define that until we know what other profiles may exist, but in general I'd say that Web Things can support multiple profiles, but Consumers should probably just pick one to use based on the protocols they support. There may be exceptions where they want to use multiple profiles, e.g. if they want to use WebSockets for events and HTTP for everything else.

mlagally · 2021-06-22T06:39:51Z

@benfrancis
I think the new section with the examples adds value and should be factored out into a separate PR, so we can discuss it stand alone.
We the can debate the controversy, whether we should to eliminate the profiling mechanism section, that is a mandate of the charter, separately.

benfrancis · 2021-06-22T11:48:18Z

Hi @mlagally, the charter requires the "Definition of a mechanism to identify the profile or profiles that a given TD is conformant to."

In my opinion this simplified version of the profile mechanism section fulfils that requirement while removing a lot of unnecessary text. The mechanism to identify that a given TD is conformant with a profile is the profile member of the Thing Description, which accepts a URI identifying a profile.

Being conformant with a profile simply means conforming with all of the normative statements in its specification. I have added some additional text to make that more clear.

Simply adding more text to what's already there would not fulfil the goal of this PR, which is to simplify the profile mechanism.

…member of TD

sebastiankb reviewed Apr 23, 2021

View reviewed changes

egekorkan reviewed Apr 25, 2021

View reviewed changes

relu91 approved these changes Apr 26, 2021

View reviewed changes

benfrancis mentioned this pull request Apr 28, 2021

Restructure WoT Core Profile section #78

Closed

sebastiankb reviewed May 3, 2021

View reviewed changes

sebastiankb mentioned this pull request May 3, 2021

Introduce profile term into TD model w3c/wot-thing-description#1121

Merged

mlagally reviewed May 5, 2021

View reviewed changes

benfrancis added 3 commits June 23, 2021 14:21

New Profile Mechanism section

4e2e8db

Clarify wording for single vs. multiple profiles and link to profile …

442f70a

…member of TD

Define profile conformance

d1933e4

benfrancis force-pushed the profile-mechanism branch from 4e29e7d to d1933e4 Compare June 23, 2021 13:25

mlagally merged commit 8da1330 into w3c:main Jun 23, 2021

benfrancis mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2021

Way to identify profile(s) #2

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

New Profile Mechanism section #79

New Profile Mechanism section #79

benfrancis commented Apr 22, 2021 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

benfrancis commented Apr 22, 2021

sebastiankb Apr 23, 2021

sebastiankb Apr 23, 2021

benfrancis Apr 23, 2021

benfrancis Apr 28, 2021

sebastiankb Apr 28, 2021

mlagally May 5, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

sebastiankb Apr 23, 2021

egekorkan Apr 25, 2021

mlagally May 5, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

egekorkan Apr 25, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

egekorkan Apr 25, 2021

relu91 left a comment

danielpeintner commented Apr 27, 2021

sebastiankb May 3, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

mlagally May 5, 2021

benfrancis May 6, 2021

sebastiankb commented May 5, 2021

benfrancis commented May 6, 2021

mlagally commented Jun 22, 2021

benfrancis commented Jun 22, 2021

New Profile Mechanism section #79

New Profile Mechanism section #79

Conversation

benfrancis commented Apr 22, 2021 • edited by pr-preview bot Loading

benfrancis commented Apr 22, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

relu91 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

danielpeintner commented Apr 27, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sebastiankb commented May 5, 2021

benfrancis commented May 6, 2021

mlagally commented Jun 22, 2021

benfrancis commented Jun 22, 2021

benfrancis commented Apr 22, 2021 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading