Binding Prefixes - Githubissues

w3c / wot-binding-templates

Web of Things (WoT) Binding Templates

http://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/

Other

22 stars 25 forks source link

Binding Prefixes #120

Open danielpeintner opened 2 years ago

danielpeintner commented 2 years ago

The TD documents defines the htv prefix for http://www.w3.org/2011/http# (see https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/#http-binding-assertions).

I suggest we have something similar for other bindings:

cov currently points to http://www.example.org/coap-binding#
mqv currently points to http://www.example.org/mqtt-binding#

Note: I think we should try to get rid of the example.org sample domains

A good place to list all known prefixes to me seems section 5.3 Protocol Vocabulary. There we could list the available binding prefixes for

HTTP
CoAP
MQTT
Modbus
...

JKRhb commented 2 years ago

In https://github.com/eclipse/thingweb.node-wot/pull/768, which implements the new CoAP binding in node-wot, @egekorkan mentioned that he would prefer to keep cov as the default prefix for the CoAP vocabulary (#149 changed the prefix to coap). Going forward, I think it would be nice to make a final decision in this regard, so that node-wot and other implementations have a "stable" prefix they can use.

CC @ektrah

egekorkan commented 2 years ago

In the call of 15.06:

We have decided to use the **v prefixes
In case of collisions, longer prefixes can be used, i.e. for m-bus it can be proposed to use mbusv
@egekorkan should update the main the document to put this as a "policy"

VladimirAlexiev commented 3 months ago

Hi @egekorkan nice to see you again! https://www.w3.org/TR/wot-binding-templates/#example-td-with-one-protocol-per-form still shows "example" for cov, mqv. Since these are used as Target examples in the RML IO spec (https://github.com/kg-construct/rml-io/issues/69), can you share what are the official namespaces?

egekorkan commented 3 months ago

Hi @egekorkan nice to see you again! https://www.w3.org/TR/wot-binding-templates/#example-td-with-one-protocol-per-form still shows "example" for cov, mqv. Since these are used as Target examples in the RML IO spec (kg-construct/rml-io#69), can you share what are the official namespaces?

We can remove it but we do not have a stable and versioned namespace at the moment. We can offer github pages versions like https://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/bindings/protocols/coap/context.jsonld and https://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/bindings/protocols/coap/ontology.ttl . Would it be enough or does it need to be published by the W3C, like we do with TD namespaces like https://www.w3.org/2019/wot/td ?

VladimirAlexiev commented 3 months ago

Both of these files define

@prefix cov: <https://www.w3.org/2019/wot/coap#> .

If the WoT community says that's the URL then that is the URL.

That URL returns 404 Not Found. So whenever you are ready, you should put a namespace document (with links to ontology renditions) there. I think @pchampin or @iherman can help you do that. Pierre and Ivan, do you see an issue with the particular URL that WoT has selected?

And @egekorkan how about mqv?

egekorkan commented 2 months ago

And @egekorkan how about mqv?

All have the same issue.

MQTT (mqv) should be at https://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/bindings/protocols/mqtt/context.jsonld
Modbus (modv) should be at https://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/bindings/protocols/modbus/context.jsonld.
BACnet doesn't have a context file yet

If the WoT community says that's the URL then that is the URL.

Do you need the URL to be stable or is it fine if we say https://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/bindings/protocols/coap/context.jsonld now and a w3.org URL later on?