[Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM Use Cases -- your changes

[Lindsay Frost]

Dear Juanjo, for the changes you are making, I have comments to discuss:

a)      changing "things" to "entities" everywhere is ok, if it helps distinquish from IoT platforms to more complex CIM platform it is fine

b)     deleting requirement 1 is problematic and I do not understand your concern that it is a "bad dependency on oneM2M".
The newest text that you delete said:

"The CIM system shall be able to store and offer contextual data describing oneM2M devices, including but not limited to, reference to the end points that will allow an application to interact with them, particularly sending command requests."



If it helps, maybe one of these alternatives is preferable for you?

I basically try to (i) keep NGSI independent of specific Mca or other interfaces (ii) avoid explicitly making a "competitor" method compared to Mca.

1)      "The CIM system shall be able to store and offer contextual information describing entities, which may relate to (sets of) IoT devices, for example oneM2M devices. The CIM system entities shall be able to reference to the IoT devices in a way which will allow an application to interact with the devices, particularly in allowing an application to send command requests via an IoT platform such as oneM2M."

2)      ... discuss above first.
/Lindsay



Juan José Hierro added comments and suggestions to CIM Use Cases<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b52-J8uKiaO8mjrU8Rutw1-CG7AfF1Pc9vlGV8avMbM/edit?disco=AAAAA2rXh9Q&usp=comment_email_document>
New


2 comments, 14 suggestions










New
Comments

Juan José Hierro
entitiesthings

If we are continuously referring to things, then we are qualifying the CIM system as an IoT system, which will be interpreted as subject of dispute with oneM2M

Reply<mailTo:Reply%20%3cd+AORGpRfoIF0NX0qBAE73jlR3IWOD6U8plLUZVFgay02FaeXhsn2hcJMhxKYtUz_KQ_lwRKKIq9nEVdfCX8tnlRMRXdUQHYqjfAwa4cwR6gTa3DPVMoOwC8M at docs.google.com%3e?subject=CIM%20Use%20Cases>Open<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b52-J8uKiaO8mjrU8Rutw1-CG7AfF1Pc9vlGV8avMbM/edit?disco=AAAAA2rXh9Q&usp=comment_email_discussion>


Juan José Hierro
a) The CIM system shall be able to store and offer contextual data describing oneM2M devices, including but not limited to, reference to the end points that will allow an application to interact with them, particularly sending command requests.

I would drop this requirement entirely. It brings a dependency on oneM2M.



L. Foogle

But is it a bad dependency? Or is it just that you prefer not to mention oneM2M explicitly?


Juan José Hierro

Is even a bad dependency


Reply<mailTo:Reply%20%3cd+AORGpRciQqSs8Ig5dCyyoUK1WmTlxuIlS8O70IR8T4GMcDe7_7qZ1h4syRiIGJrNWegSvRnvHaqZaZpspFHDjqrJw972XvWGsdydfPTKWyP8_oUonsu-I_A at docs.google.com%3e?subject=CIM%20Use%20Cases>Open<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b52-J8uKiaO8mjrU8Rutw1-CG7AfF1Pc9vlGV8avMbM/edit?disco=AAAAA2rXh8A&usp=comment_email_discussion>

Suggestions

Juan José Hierro
Delete: “a) The CIM system shall be able to store and offer contextual data describing oneM2M devices, includ…”




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-etsi/attachments/20161018/2ec970c7/attachment.html>