Skip to content

Script management vs Thing management #22

Closed
@zolkis

Description

@zolkis

Moving the discussion from the WoT WG mailing list to this issue.

History:

  • Issue Define UA/runtime for WoT #2 tries to clarify the definition and scope for WoT Runtime (WR) vs scripts vs Things
  • earlier attempts to define a script management interface ran into the issue whether such interface is covered by the WoT WG charter.

Proposal: allow Thing creation and TD modifications not only from local, but also remote WoT Runtimes.

Advantages:

  • no need for separate script management concepts and interface
  • WoT application is defined as a set of Things running in one or more WoT Runtimes, and deployment reduces to using the Scripting API, in fact developing a deployment script run in a WR (e.g. in a browser) that would modify/add functionality of remote devices
  • WoT Runtime would encapsulate security related checks and policies, and could validate deployed functionality based on the TD.

Disadvantages:

  • there are strong opinions that a script should only affect local WR (i.e. create/modify only Thing local to the WR)
  • assumption on a connection, proxy object and protocol/serialization of Thing
  • conceptually speaking, managing remote Things is not different from managing scripts, so we'd rather manage scripts (proposal needed on how).

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions