perhaps the naming fieldvalues would be better in that case <fieldvalues timestamp='xxx'> <numeric ...> <numeric ...> <numeric ...> </fieldvalues>
I would also like the possibility of omitting the timestamp on the surrounding and have timestamp on each value <fieldvalues > <numeric timestamp='xxx' ...> <numeric timestamp='yyy' ...> <numeric timestamp='zzz' ...> </fieldvalues> *Regards* Joachim Lindborg CTO, systems architect Sustainable Innovation SUST.se Barnhusgatan 3 111 23 Stockholm Email: joachim.lindb...@sust.se linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/joachimlindborg Tel +46 706-442270 2014/1/19 Joakim Eriksson <joak...@sics.se> > I think that the XEP-323 timestamp is a bit strange. > > I would have a set of measurements or sensor data with > an extra attribute / meta data which is the timestamp. > But in XEP-323 is looks like the timestamp is the top node: > > <fields xmlns='urn:xmpp:iot:sensordata' seqnr='4'> > <node nodeId='Device01'> > <timestamp value='2013-03-07T19:00:00'> > <numeric name='Temperature' ../> > <numeric name='Runtime' .../> > </timestamp> > </node> > </fields> > > So in this case is looks like the timestamp has a set of attributes > that are temperatures, runtime, etc. which feels a bit strange. > I think it would make more sense if it would be like this: > > <sensordata> > <timestamp value='xxx'> > <numeric ...> > <numeric ...> > <numeric ...> > </sensordata> > > or (timestamp in the sensordata node) > > <sensordata timestamp='xxx'> > <numeric ...> > <numeric ...> > <numeric ...> > </sensordata> > > > > > Best regards, > -- Joakim Eriksson, SICS > >
