Open lu-zero opened 6 months ago
General Plan
Note that it's the HTTP Basic Profile which specifies action operations, the HTTP SSE and HTTP Webhook profiles only cover subscribing to events and observing properties.
What counts as an implementation? A Producer, a Consumer or both? See also: #395.
Some of the 49 open issues are small editorial changes but some are whole new features, particularly for the Webhook profile which is missing some features which could be argued to be essential for practical implementation at scale (e.g. #378 rate limiting). It is also still missing an event payload format (#258, which for some reason is currently tagged as 1.1 but really needs defining to enable interoperability in 1.0).
Open questions
I wouldn't object to 1.0 being published as a NOTE if it lacks sufficient implementations, then just move on to 2.0. But I would prefer to see it proceed to REC if we can.
Some suggested next steps:
queryaction
, cancelaction
and queryallactions
operations from the HTTP Basic Profile protocol binding, but I would then question whether that profile has sufficient value over the defaults already defined in the Thing Description specification to be worth publishing. I would also question whether the HTTP SSE and HTTP Webhook profiles can proceed to REC, since they will both define payload binding details which can't currently be expressed with existing binding templates.I agree with @benfrancis. Notes and guidelines are often overlooked and there will be a variety of diverging implementations, which misses the goal of guaranteeing ad-hoc interoperability, i.e. out of the box.
Let's tie the loose ends together and get the Profile 1.0 specification out of the door by working through the Profile-1.0 issues, finding owners for each of them and address them in due course.
Profile 1.0 Plan
General Plan
Outputs
Open questions