Hi Ingo - I'm lurking on the list so have probably missed the context if the terminology discussion. Having just experienced a couple of drawn out vocabulary working groups, I am wondering why IDoT is not attempting to simply adopt a vocabulary/ontology/list of terms from any of the IoT specific groups. Then, the focus here could be extensions to deal with the ID aspects... Andrew. On Friday, January 31, 2014, <Ingo.Friese@telekom.de> wrote:
Dear All,
Jeff started with Sensor, Actuator and Processor. I'd like to extend this model a bit. Because I think the processor could be either near to the actuator (e.g. the processor in a house regulates the heating because of sensor data.
This "intelligence" could also be somewhere in the cloud/internet. The processor could be a service on a server somewhere or and app on a smartphone.
So I'd like to add an IoT instance in the network.
A second point are intermediates or gateways (names are to be discussed). Because many solutions have one or more instances between sensor/actuator an the service in the cloud. Here e.g. several sensors are concentrated.
What do you think?
Best,
Ingo
-- *Andrew Hughes *CISM CISSP Independent Consultant *In Turn Information Management Consulting* +1 250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ *Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security *