New rule for creating new Device definitions
We need to define a rule in TS-0023 (and perhaps in a "best practice" page in the online documentation) how to create a new Device definition for a Device. At least the following possibilities are open
- Create a new Device definition with a new name: when there are no or not many similarities to an existing Device definition
- Update an existing Device definition: when the new Device definition is very similar to an existing Device definition, and when the new Device definition would only add optional ModuleClasses.
With SDT 4, where Device inheritance is supported, there is another choice:
- Inherit from a similar Device, and add new and remove not wanted ModuleClasses.
-
Just a thought for this action, in case I am not present during discussion.
Depending on how ‘similar’ the model is, using a single model with optional attributes creates more work for devices or applications to use the model. A discover of a “model-type” would then need to be conditioned based on the absence/presence of an attribute.
If similar means a variation, binary switch versus dimmer switch, then optional attributes is good.
-
Bob, thank you for the input. The dimmer switch is a good example: it is basically a binarySwitch + a dimming ModuleClass. A query would actually look for the absence or presence of specific ModuleClasses to derive the actual functionality resp category of that device.
But creating a new DimmingDevice (perhaps by inheriting from BinarySwitch) would have advantages as well. One could easily add a semantic reference (see the new contribution for semanticURI).
Also, as Yongjing said on the mailing list, the new feature to define a "Product" could also help here.