Copyright © 2017-2021 W3C ® ( MIT , ERCIM , Keio , Beihang ). W3C liability , trademark and permissive document license rules apply.
The W3C Web of Things (WoT) is intended to enable interoperability across IoT platforms and application domains. One key mechanism for accomplishing this goal is the definition and use of metadata describing the interactions an IoT device or service makes available over the network at a suitable level of abstraction. The WoT Thing Description specification satisfies this objective.
However, in order to use a Thing its Thing Description first has to be obtained. The WoT Discovery process described in this document addresses this problem. WoT Discovery needs to support the distribution of WoT Thing Descriptions in a variety of use cases. This includes ad-hoc and engineered systems; during development and at runtime; and on both local and global networks. The process also needs to work with existing discovery mechanisms, be secure, protect private information, and be able to efficiently handle updates to WoT Thing Descriptions and the dynamic and diverse nature of the IoT ecosystem.
The WoT Discovery process is divided into two phases, Introduction, and Exploration. The Introduction phase leverages existing discovery mechanisms but does not directly expose metadata; they are simply used to discover Exploration services, which provide metadata but only after secure authentication and authorization. This document normatively defines two Exploration services, one for WoT Thing self-description with a single WoT Thing Description and a searchable WoT Thing Description Directory service for collections of Thing Descriptions. A variety of Introduction services are also described and where necessary normative definitions are given to support them.
This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/.
This document was published by the Web of Things Working Group as an Editor's Draft.
Publication as an Editor's Draft does not imply endorsement by W3C and its Members.
This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
This document was produced by a group operating under the 1 August 2017 W3C Patent Policy . W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy .
This document is governed by the 2 November 2021 W3C Process Document .
The Web of Things (WoT) defines an architecture that supports the integration and use of web technologies with IoT devices. The WoT Architecture [ wot-architecture ] document defines the basic concepts and patterns of usage supported. However, the WoT Thing Description [ wot-thing-description ] is a key specification for WoT Discovery since it is the purpose of WoT Discovery to make WoT Thing Descriptions available. Specifically, WoT Discovery has to allow authenticated and authorized entities (and only those entities) to find WoT Thing Descriptions satisfying a set of criteria, such as being near a certain location, or having certain semantics, or containing certain interactions. Conversely, in order to support security and privacy objectives, the WoT Discovery process must not leak information to unauthorized entities. This includes leaking information that a given entity is requesting certain information, not just the information distributed in the Thing Descriptions themselves.
There are already a number of discovery mechanisms defined, so we have to establish why we are proposing a new one. First, many existing discovery mechanisms have relatively weak security and privacy protections. One of our objectives is to establish a mechanism that not only uses best practices to protect metadata, but that can be upgraded to support future best practices as needed. Second, we are using discovery in a broad sense to include both local and non-local mechanisms. While a local mechanism might use a broadcast protocol, non-local mechanisms might go beyond the current network segment where broadcast is not scalable, and so a different approach, such as a search service, is needed. Our approach is to use existing mechanisms as needed to bootstrap into a more general and secure metadata distribution system. Third, the metadata we are distributing, the WoT Thing Description, is highly structured and includes rich data such as data schemas and semantic annotations. Existing discovery mechanisms based on a list of simple key-value pairs are not appropriate. At the same time, use of existing standards for semantic data query, such as SPARQL [ SPARQL11-OVERVIEW ], while potentially suitable for some advanced use cases, might require too much effort for many anticipated IoT applications. Therefore in order to address more basic applications, we also define some simpler query mechanisms.
After defining some basic terminology, we will summarize the basic use cases and requirements for WoT Discovery. These are a subset of the more detailed and exhaustive use cases and requirements presented in the WoT Use Cases [ wot-usecases ] and WoT Architecture [ wot-architecture ] documents. Then we will describe the basic architecture of the WoT Discovery process, which uses a two-phase Introduction/Exploration approach. The basic goal of this architecture is to be able to use existing discovery standards to bootstrap access to protected discovery services, but to distribute detailed metadata only to authorized users, and to also protect those making queries from eavesdroppers as much as possible. We then describe details of specific Introduction and Exploration mechanisms. In particular, we define in detail a normative API for a WoT Thing Description Directory (WoT TDD) service that provides a search mechanism for collections of WoT Thing Descriptions that can be dynamically registered by Things or entities acting on their behalf. The WoT Discovery mechanism however also supports self-description by individual Things and one issue we address is how to distinguish between these two approaches. Finally, we discuss some security and privacy considerations, including a set of potential risks and mitigations.
As well as sections marked as non-normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are non-normative. Everything else in this specification is normative.
The key words MAY , MUST , OPTIONAL , RECOMMENDED , and SHOULD in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [ RFC2119 ] [ RFC8174 ] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
This section is non-normative.
The fundamental WoT terminology such as Thing , Thing Description ( TD ), Property , Action , Event are defined in Section 3 of the WoT Architecture specification [ WOT-ARCHITECTURE ].
In addition, this specification introduces the following definitions:
id
attribute).
This section is non-normative.
Figure 1 shows an overview of discovery process.To do: an overview of the two-phase approach and its purpose, which is to support controlled and authenticated access to metadata by authorized users only.
This chapter describes mechanisms for initial contact with Things or Thing Description Directories . Any of the following mechanisms may be provided by the Thing or the Thing Description Directory to Consumers. The result of an introduction mechanism is always a URL (address) of an exploration service which can be used to obtain detailed metadata (TDs) after suitable authentication. It is also possible for multiple introduction mechanisms to be used and the results merged. No particular introduction mechanism is mandatory, as long as the URL of at least one exploration service is somehow obtained.
To obtain an URL of an exploration service, any mechanism that results in a single URL MAY be used. This includes Bluetooth beacons, QR codes, and written URLs to be typed by a user. A request on all such URLs MUST result in a TD as prescribed in § 6.1 Self-description . For self-describing Things, this can be the TD of the Thing itself. If the URL references a Thing Description Directory , this MUST be the Directory Description of the Thing Description Directory .
A
Thing
or
Thing
Description
Directory
MAY
use
the
Well-Known
Uniform
Resource
Identifier
[
RFC8615
]
to
advertise
its
presence.
If
the
Thing
or
Thing
Description
Directory
use
the
Well-Known
Uniform
Resource
Identifier
to
advertise
its
presense,
it
MUST
register
its
own
Thing
or
Directory
Description
into
the
following
path:
/.well-known/wot-thing-description
.
When a request is made at the above Well-Known URI, the server MUST return a Thing Description as prescribed in § 6.1 Self-description .
The
service
name
in
Well-Known
URI
(
wot-thing-description
)
is
tentative.
"Well-Known
URIs"
registry
and
contents
of
registration
request
is
described
in
Section
3.1
of
[
RFC8615
].
A Thing or Thing Description Directory MAY use the DNS-Based Service Discovery (DNS-SD)[ RFC6763 ]. This can be also be used to discover them on the same link by combining Multicast DNS (mDNS)[ RFC6762 ].
In
DNS-SD,
format
of
the
Service
Instance
Name
is
Instance.Service.Domain
.
The
Service
part
is
a
pair
of
labels
following
the
conventions
of
[
RFC2782
].
The
first
label
has
an
underscore
followed
by
the
Service
Name,
and
the
second
label
describes
the
protocol.
The
Service
Name
to
indicate
the
Thing
or
Thing
Description
Directory
MUST
be
_wot
.
And
the
Service
Name
to
indicate
the
Thing
Description
Directory
MUST
be
_directory._sub._wot
.
The
Service
Names
_wot
and
_directory._sub._wot
are
tentative.
The
following
Service
Names
are
used
in
the
existing
implementations:
_wot
,
_device._sub._wot
,
_directory._sub._wot
,
_webthing
,
_wot-servient
.
To
use
a
Service
Name,
registration
to
"Underscored
and
Globally
Scoped
DNS
Node
Names"
Registry
[
RFC8552
]
is
required.
In
addition,
the
following
information
MUST
be
included
in
the
TXT
record
that
is
pointed
to
by
the
Service
Instance
Name:
td
type
Thing
or
Directory
.
If
omitted,
the
type
is
assumed
to
be
Thing
.
The
following
key/value
pairs
are
used
in
the
existing
implementations:
retrieve
:
Absolute
path
name
of
the
API
to
get
an
array
of
Thing
Description
IDs
from
the
directory
service.
register
:
Absolute
path
name
of
the
API
to
register
a
Directory
Description
with
the
Thing
Description
Directory
.
path
:
The
URI
of
the
thing
description
on
the
Web
Thing's
web
server
td
:
Prefix
of
directory
service
API
tls
:
Value
of
1
if
the
Web
Thing
supports
connections
via
HTTPS.
Figure 2 and Figure 3 shows example sequences of discovery of Thing and Thing Description Directory using DNS-SD and mDNS.
A Thing or Thing Description Directory MAY advertise its presence using the Constrained RESTful Environment (CoRE) Link Format [ RFC6690 ]. A Thing or Thing Description Directory MAY use the CoRE Resource Directory [ CoRE-RD ] to register a link to the Thing or Directory Description.
The
resource
type
(
rt
)
of
the
Link
that
targets
the
Thing
Description
of
the
Thing
MUST
be
wot.thing
.
The
resource
type
of
the
Link
that
targets
the
Directory
Description
of
the
Thing
Description
Directory
MUST
be
wot.directory
.
The
resource
types
wot.thing
and
wot.directory
are
tentative.
See
also
§
9.
IANA
Considerations
.
A Thing or Thing Description Directory MAY advertise its presence using the Decentralized Identifier (DID) [ DID-CORE ].
The DID Document obtained by resolving the DID of a Thing or Thing Description Directory MUST contains a Service Endpoint which point to Thing Description of the Thing or Directory Description of the Thing Description Directory .
To do: Description of supported explorations, and requirements for new exploration mechanisms.
Figure 5 illustrates the Discovery ontology as an extension of the Thing ontology.
The
ontology
includes
a
class
for
metadata
that
are
associated
with
TDs
stored
in
a
directory.
This
class
is
called
RegistrationInformation
and
described
as
part
of
the
directory
specification
in
§
6.2.1.1
Registration
Information
.
Moreover, the Discovery ontology defines two new Thing Description classes that may be used to model special exploratory metadata:
ThingDirectory
from
the
discovery
context
or
URI
https://www.w3.org/2021/wot/discovery#ThingDirectory
.
§ 8.1 Directory API Thing Description which describes the API of the Thing Description Directory is an example of this TD class.
ThingLink
from
the
discovery
context
or
URI
https://www.w3.org/2021/wot/discovery#ThingLink
.
A
Thing
Link
MUST
define
the
referenced
TD
as
a
Link
with
describedby
link
relation
type,
application/td+json
media
type
and
href
set
to
the
target
URL.
Example 2 is an example Thing Link.
A Thing Link can be used in various scenarios. For example:
The self-description is an exploration mechanism in which a Thing hosts its own TD and exposes it at a URL or through others means. If exposed at a URL (e.g. over HTTP or CoAP), the URL may be advertised via one of the § 5. Introduction Mechanisms . The hosted TD may also be registered inside a Thing Description Directory as prescribed in § 6.2 Directory .
The self-description using the following protocols must be according to the given specification:The HTTP-based self-description SHOULD be over HTTPS (HTTP Over TLS). The server SHOULD serve the requests after performing necessary authentication and authorization.
The
HTTP
server
MUST
serve
the
TD
with
a
GET
method.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
200
(OK)
status,
contain
application/td+json
Content-Type
header,
and
the
TD
in
body.
The
server
MAY
provide
alternative
representations
through
server-driven
content
negotiation,
that
is
by
honouring
the
request's
Accept
header
and
responding
with
the
supported
TD
serialization
and
equivalent
Content-Type
header.
The
HTTP
server
MUST
respond
to
HEAD
requests
by
returning
only
the
headers
equivalent
to
those
returned
by
a
GET
request
to
the
same
endpoint.
This
enables
clients
to
retrieve
HTTP
headers
such
as
the
Content-Length
in
advance
to
know
the
size
of
the
TD
(in
bytes)
and
decide
on
an
efficient
query
strategy.
Error responses:
To do: Describe mechanisms for TDs to be hosted in a searchable directory service.
To Do: Formal definition of information contained in a directory and its organization.
RegistrationInformation
class
is
associated
with
TDs
that
are
stored
in
a
directory.
The
following
table
lists
the
registration
information
attributes
for
use
within
TDs
that
embed
or
reference
the
Discovery
context.
Note
that
only
an
Enriched
TD
embeds
the
registration
information.
In
this
table,
client
refers
to
the
producer
or
consumer
of
a
TD
and
server
refers
to
the
Thing
Description
Directory
.
Vocabulary term | Description | Client Assignment | Server Assignment | Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
created
|
Provides
information
when
the
TD
instance
was
created
inside
the
directory.
This MAY be set by the directory and returned to consumers. |
read-only | optional |
dateTime
|
modified
|
Provides
information
when
the
TD
instance
was
last
modified
inside
the
directory.
This MAY be set by the directory and returned to consumers. |
read-only | optional |
dateTime
|
expires
|
Provides
the
absolute
time
for
when
the
TD
instance
registration
expires.
The producer MAY set this to indicate the absolute expiry time during the registration.
For
servers
that
support
expirable
TDs:
If
|
optional | optional |
dateTime
|
ttl
|
Time-to-live:
relative
amount
of
time
in
seconds
from
the
registration
time
until
when
the
TD
instance
registration
expires.
The producer MAY set this to indicate the relative expiry time during the registration.
For
servers
that
support
expirable
TDs:
The
server
MUST
use
|
optional | read-only |
number
|
retrieved
|
The
time
at
which
the
TD
was
retrieved
from
the
server.
This is useful for clients that intend to process other absolute timestamps but do not have an internal clock or other means of acquiring the current time. |
read-only | optional |
dateTime
|
Producers can set the expiry time to inform the directory and other consumers about the validity of the TD registrations. The expiry is also a useful indicator to inform the consumers about expiry of dynamic TDs , e.g. when changes to metadata such as geolocation or properties are expected to be valid for a limited period. Consumers may rely on the expiry time to know how long a retrieved TD will be valid and when they need to request a more recent one. Consumers who retrieve an expired TD may consider it as metadata of an inactive client.
For the servers, the expiry time is useful for implementing automatic removal of obsolete or accidental registrations. Servers SHOULD periodically purge TDs that are past their expiry times. Prescribing a global mandate or upper limit for the expiry time is application-specific and beyond the scope of this specification. The servers MAY mandate or set a configurable upper limit to expiry times and refuse incompliant requests. The purging by servers is particularly beneficial when interacting with clients (e.g. IoT devices) that are unable to explicitly deregister their TDs . This could be due to protocol-specific limitations, failure, destruction, or ungraceful decommissioning. Such clients should set a reasonably short expiry time and periodically extend it during the normal operation. If a client ceases to operate, a directory with purging capability will automatically remove its registration.
The HTTP API responses must use appropriate status codes described in this section for success and error responses. The HTTP API MUST use the Problem Details [ RFC7807 ] format to carry error details in HTTP client error (4xx) and server error (5xx) responses. This enables both machines and humans to know the high-level error class and fine-grained details.
The
Problem
Details
error
type
field
is
a
URI
reference
which
could
used
to
map
the
occurred
error
to
WoT-specific
error
class.
There
are
few
open
issues
raising
the
lack
of
WoT-specific
error
types:
wot-discovery#44
,
wot-thing-description#303
,
wot-scripting-api#200
.
For
now,
type
can
be
omitted
which
defaults
to
"about:blank",
and
title
should
be
set
to
HTTP
status
text.
For
each
HTTP
endpoint
that
responds
to
the
GET
method,
the
server
MUST
accept
HEAD
requests
and
return
only
the
headers.
This
allows
clients
to
retrieve
headers
such
as
the
Content-Length
without
receiving
the
body
and
decide
on
a
suitable
strategy
to
query
the
information.
For
example,
a
constrained
client
can
request
only
the
necessary
parts
of
an
object
(using
an
apprpriate
search
query)
or
retrieve
a
list
of
items
in
small
subsets.
The Registration API is a RESTful HTTP API in accordance with the recommendations defined in [ RFC7231 ] and [ REST-IOT ]. The default serialization format for all request and success response bodies MUST be JSON, with JSON-LD 1.1 [ JSON-LD11 ] syntax to support extensions and semantic processing. Directories MAY accept additional representations based on request's indicated Content-Type or Content-Encoding, and provide additional representations through server-driven content negotiation.
The Registration API MUST provide create, retrieve, update, delete, and listing (CRUDL) interfaces. The operations are described below:
The
API
MUST
allow
registration
of
a
TD
object
passed
as
request
body.
The
request
SHOULD
contain
application/td+json
Content-Type
header
for
JSON
serialization
of
TD.
The
TD
object
is
validated
in
accordance
with
§
6.2.2.1.6
Validation
.
Note
that
a
TD
may
or
may
not
be
generated
by
the
Thing
it
describes.
For
brownfield
devices
in
particular
a
separate
Discoverer
process
or
service
may
be
required
that
generates
and
registers
a
TD
for
a
Thing
on
its
behalf.
A
TD
which
is
identified
with
an
id
attribute
MUST
be
handled
differently
with
one
that
has
no
identifier
(
Anonymous
TD
).
The
create
operations
are
elaborated
below:
PUT
request
at
/things/{id}
endpoint,
where
id
is
the
unique
TD
identifier.
Upon
successful
processing,
the
server
MUST
respond
with
201
(Created)
status.
Note: If the target location corresponds to an existing TD, the request shall instead proceed as an Update operation and respond the appropriate status code (see Update section).
The
create
operation
for
TDs
that
have
identifiers
is
specified
as
createThing
action
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
POST
request
at
/things
endpoint.
Upon
successful
processing,
the
server
MUST
respond
with
201
(Created)
status
and
a
Location
header
containing
a
system-generated
identifier
for
the
TD.
The
scheme
of
the
system-generated
ID
is
described
in
§
6.2.1.3
Anonymous
TD
Identifiers
.
The
create
operation
for
Anonymous
TDs
is
specified
as
createAnonymousThing
action
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
A
server
that
supports
expirable
TDs
will
realize
such
functionality
as
described
in
§
6.2.1.2
Registration
Expiry
.
In
particular,
if
ttl
(relative
expiry)
is
given
during
the
creation,
such
servers
will
calculate
and
store
the
expires
value.
Error responses:
Registration
of
TDs
using
non-idempotent
HTTP
POST
method
enables
creation
of
anonymous
TDs
(TDs
without
id
attribute).
The
producer
can
distinguish
between
the
created
TDs
using
the
unique-system
generated
IDs
given
in
the
response
Location
header.
A side-effect of this is that clients will be able to register duplicate TDs accidentally or on purpose.
Need to clarify:
A
TD
MUST
be
retrieved
from
the
directory
using
an
HTTP
GET
request
at
/things/{id}
endpoint,
where
id
is
the
unique
TD
identifier.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
200
(OK)
status,
contain
application/td+json
Content-Type
header,
and
the
requested
TD
in
body.
The
retrieve
operation
is
specified
as
retrieveThing
action
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
Error responses:
id
not
found.
The following is an example of a retrieved TD: This is an Enriched TD which includes the registration information such as the creation and modification time of the TD within the directory.
The
example
below
shows
a
retrieved
Anonymous
TD
that
is
in
Enriched
TD
form
and
has
local
identifier
urn:uuid:48951ff3-4019-4e67-b217-dbbf011873dc
.
The following is an example of a retrieved TD that was registered with a relative expiry time of 3600 seconds (one hour). The server has calculated the absolute expiry time as one hour after the modification time. For the sake of readability, the time values in this example are set to exact numbers. In realistic settings, time values may include fractions.
The API MUST allow modifications to an existing TD as full replacement or partial updates. The update operations are described below:
PUT
request
at
/things/{id}
endpoint,
where
id
is
the
identifier
of
the
existing
TD.
The
request
SHOULD
contain
application/td+json
Content-Type
header
for
JSON
serialization
of
TD.
The
TD
object
is
validated
in
accordance
with
§
6.2.2.1.6
Validation
.
Upon
success,
the
server
MUST
respond
with
204
(No
Content)
status.
A
server
that
supports
expirable
TDs
will
realize
such
functionality
as
described
in
§
6.2.1.2
Registration
Expiry
.
If
ttl
(relative
expiry)
is
set
during
the
update
operation,
the
server
will
calculate
and
set
the
expires
(absolute
expiry)
value.
This
operation
is
specified
as
updateThing
property
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
Note:
If
the
target
location
does
not
correspond
to
an
existing
TD,
the
request
shall
instead
proceed
as
a
Create
operation
and
respond
the
appropriate
status
code
(see
Create
section).
In
other
words,
an
HTTP
PUT
request
acts
as
a
create
or
update
operation.
PATCH
request
at
/things/{id}
endpoint,
where
id
is
the
identifier
of
the
existing
TD.
The
partial
update
MUST
be
processed
using
the
JSON
merge
patch
format
format
described
in
[
RFC7396
].
The
request
MUST
contain
application/merge-patch+json
Content-Type
header
for
JSON
serialization
of
the
merge
patch
document.
The
input
MUST
be
in
Partial
TD
form
and
conform
to
the
original
TD
structure.
If
the
input
contains
members
that
appear
in
the
original
TD,
their
values
are
replaced.
If
a
member
do
not
appear
in
the
original
TD,
that
member
is
added.
If
the
member
is
set
to
null
but
appear
in
the
original
TD,
that
member
is
removed.
Members
with
object
values
are
processed
recursively.
After
applying
the
modifications,
the
TD
object
is
validated
in
accordance
with
§
6.2.2.1.6
Validation
.
Upon
success,
the
server
MUST
respond
with
a
204
(No
Content)
status.
A
server
that
supports
expirable
TDs
will
realize
such
functionality
as
described
in
§
6.2.1.2
Registration
Expiry
.
During
the
partial
update
operation,
if
the
resulting
TD
has
ttl
(relative
expiry),
the
server
will
calculate
and
set
a
new
expires
(absolute
expiry)
value.
This
operation
is
specified
as
partiallyUpdateThing
property
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
The
following
example
is
a
merge
patch
document
to
update
only
the
base
and
registration
expires
fields
of
a
TD:
Error responses:
id
not
found
(for
PATCH
only).
A
TD
MUST
be
removed
from
the
directory
when
an
HTTP
DELETE
request
is
submitted
at
/things/{id}
,
where
id
is
the
identifier
of
the
existing
TD.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
204
(No
Content)
status.
The
retrieve
operation
is
specified
as
deleteThing
property
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
Error responses:
id
not
found.
The listing endpoint provides different ways to query the collection of full TD objects from the directory.
In
many
scenarios,
retrieving
parts
instead
of
full
TD
objects
is
preferred
because
only
a
subset
of
elements
are
needed
(e.g.
id
and
href
of
a
property
for
all
TDs)
and
to
save
networking
resources.
The
Search
API
allows
querying
parts
of
TD
objects;
see
§
6.2.2.4
Search
.
The
list
of
TDs
MUST
be
retrieved
from
the
directory
using
an
HTTP
GET
request
at
/things
endpoint.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
200
(OK)
status,
contain
application/ld+json
Content-Type
header,
and
an
array
of
TDs
in
the
body.
There may be scenarios in which clients need to retrieve the collection in small subsets of TDs. While the Search API ( § 6.2.2.4 Search ) does offer the ability to query a specific range, it may not be optimal, nor developer-friendly. The server MAY support pagination to return the collection in small subsets. The pagination must be based on the following rules:
limit
query
parameter
is
set
to
a
positive
integer,
the
server
MAY
respond
with
a
subset
of
TDs
totalling
to
less
than
or
equal
to
the
requested
number.
next
Link
header
[
RFC8288
]
with
the
URL
of
the
next
subset.
The
next
link
MUST
have
the
same
limit
argument
given
on
the
initial
request
as
well
as
a
zero-based
offset
argument
anchored
at
the
beginning
of
the
next
subset.
The
link
may
be
absolute
or
relative
to
directory
API's
base
URL.
Moreover,
it
may
include
additional
arguments
that
are
necessary
for
ordering
or
session
management.
canonical
Link
header
[
RFC8288
]
pointing
to
the
collection
and
include
an
etag
parameter
to
represent
the
current
state
of
the
collection.
The
link
may
be
absolute
or
relative
to
directory
API's
base
URL.
The
etag
value
could
be
a
revision
number,
timestamp,
or
UUID
Version
4,
set
whenever
the
TD
collection
changes
in
a
way
that
affects
the
ordering
of
the
TDs.
The
clients
may
rely
on
the
etag
value
to
know
whether
the
collection
remains
consistent
across
paginated
retrieval
of
the
collection.
For
example,
creation
or
deletion
of
TDs
or
update
of
TD
fields
used
for
ordering
may
make
shift
the
calculated
paging
window.
sort_by
to
select
a
field
(e.g.
created
)
and
sort_order
to
choose
the
order
(i.e.
asc
or
desc
for
ascending
and
descending
ordering).
If
the
server
does
not
support
custom
sorting,
it
MUST
reject
the
request
with
501
(Not
Implemented)
status.
If
sorting
attributes
are
accepted,
they
MUST
be
added
consistently
to
all
next
links.
This above specification follows a subset of Linked Data Paging [ LDP-Paging ] to allow optional pagination of the JSON-LD array. Additional parts of Linked Data Paging may be implemented for examples to honour client's query preference or to add other link relations for semantic annotation and alternative navigation links.
The following example provides a walk-through of the paginated retrieval of TDs:
Alternative to a pure array of TDs as the body of the response, the server MAY send a more verbose payload allowing server-side information, like pagination information, to be put in addition to the actual data.
For pagination information the alternative format leans against the formats as described in Hydra Advanced Concepts , more concretely the Partial Collection View . Adapted to our purposes and using the members field to accomodate the array of TDs, it looks like as follows for the listing endpoint:
To
tell
the
server
which
format
to
send,
the
additional
query
parameter
?format=array|collection
can
be
added
to
the
request.
?format=array
is
the
default
parameter,
does
not
have
to
be
provided
explicitly,
and
yields
to
a
server
response
of
the
pure
array
of
TDs.
?format=collection
should
yield
to
a
server
response
with
the
format
as
described
in
Example
8
.
Serializing and returning the full list of TDs may be burdensome to servers. As such, servers should serialize incrementally and utilize protocol-specific mechanisms to respond in chunks. HTTP/1.1 servers SHOULD perform chunked Transfer-Encoding [ RFC7230 ] to respond the data incrementally. Most HTTP/1.1 clients automatically process the data received with chunked transfer encoding. Memory-constrained applications which require the full list should consider processing the received data incrementally. Chunked transfer encoding is not supported in HTTP/2. HTTP/2 servers SHOULD respond the data incrementally using HTTP Frames [ RFC7540 ].
The
listing
operation
is
specified
as
things
property
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
Error responses:
The syntactic validation of TD objects before storage is RECOMMENDED to prevent common erroneous submissions. The server MAY use Thing Description JSON Schema to validate standard TD vocabulary, or a more comprehensive JSON Schema to also validate extensions.
If
the
server
fails
to
validate
the
TD
object,
it
MUST
inform
the
client
with
necessary
details
to
identify
and
resolve
the
errors.
The
validation
error
MUST
be
described
as
Problem
Details
[
RFC7807
]
with
an
extension
field
called
validationErrors
,
set
to
an
array
of
objects
with
field
and
description
fields.
This
is
necessary
to
represent
the
error
in
a
machine-readable
way.
How much validation does a directory need to do?
To do: Other administrative functions not having to do with CRUD of individual records, for example, security configuration. Also, administrator roles may expand the capabilities of administrators for management of records (for instance, the ability to delete a record they did not create).
The
Notification
API
is
to
notify
clients
about
the
changes
to
Thing
Descriptions
maintained
within
the
directory.
The
Notification
API
MUST
follow
the
Server-Sent
Events
[
EVENTSOURCE
]
specifications
to
serve
events
to
clients
at
/events
endpoint.
In
particular,
the
server
responds
to
successful
requests
with
200
(OK)
status
and
text/event-stream
Content
Type.
Re-connecting
clients
may
continue
from
the
last
event
by
providing
the
last
event
ID
as
Last-Event-ID
header
value.
The
server
SHOULD
provide
an
event
ID
as
the
id
field
in
each
event
and
respond
to
re-connecting
clients
by
delivering
all
missed
events.
create
,
update
,
and
delete
event
types.
The server MUST support event filtering based on the event type given by the client upon subscription.
For
example,
given
the
URI
Template
/events{/type}
:
/events/create
instructs
the
server
to
only
deliver
events
of
type
create
/events
instructs
the
server
to
deliver
all
events
create
and
delete
)
from
the
server.
When
using
HTTP/2,
multiple
subscriptions
on
the
same
domain
(HTTP
streams)
get
multiplexed
on
a
single
connection.
diff
query
parameter
is
set
to
true
and
the
event
has
create
type,
the
server
MAY
return
the
whole
TD
object
as
event
data.
diff
query
parameter
is
set
to
true
and
the
event
has
update
type,
the
server
MAY
inform
the
client
about
the
updated
parts
following
the
JSON
Merge
Patch
[
RFC7396
]
format.
An
update
event
data
that
is
based
on
JSON
Merge
Patch
[
RFC7396
]
MUST
always
include
the
identifier
of
the
TD
regardless
of
whether
it
is
changed.
The following example shows the event triggered on update of the TD from Example 11 :
diff
query
parameter
MUST
be
ignored
for
delete
events.
In
other
words,
the
server
does
not
need
to
include
additional
properties
in
the
payload
of
delete
events
when
diff
is
set
to
true
.
diff
query
parameter
is
requested
with
such
query
parameter,
it
MUST
reject
the
request
with
501
(Not
Implemented)
status.
This
is
to
inform
the
clients
about
the
lack
of
such
functionality
at
the
connection
time
to
avoid
runtime
exceptions
caused
by
missing
event
data
attributes.
The
Notification
API
is
specified
as
three
event
affordances
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
,
namely:
thingCreation
,
thingUpdate
,
and
thingDeletion
.
Some early SSE implementations (including HTML5 EventSource) do not allow setting custom headers in the initial HTTP request. Authorization header is required in few OAuth2 flows and passing it as a query parameter is not advised . There are polyfills for browsers and modern libraries which allow setting Authorization header.
Sub-API
to
search
a
directory,
e.g.
issue
a
query.
There
are
different
forms
and
levels
of
query
possible,
for
example,
including
both
syntactic
(JSONPath,
XPath)
vs.
and
semantic
(SPARQL),
queries.
In
general,
query
types
are
optional
and
the
more
advanced
all
query
types
may
do
not
need
to
be
supported
by
all
directories.
So
this
directories
-
or
at
all.
This
API
will
have
further
subsections,
some
of
which
will
be
optional.
has
subsections
for
each
query
type.
Search
also
includes
a
sub-API
for
managing
listing
the
contents
(eg
returned
by
a
query)
including
handling
pagination,
etc.
Note
that
There
is
also
one
special
form
of
query
will
be
able
to
return
everything.
the
entire
contents
of
the
directory.
Results
may
be
subject
to
the
requestor's
authorization.
authorization,
and
this
query
form
is
only
suitable
for
small
directories.
Larger
directories
(with,
for
instance,
more
than
a
hundred
or
so
entries)
should
implement
some
form
of
query.
To
discuss
further:
Federated
queries
to
other
TDDs,
Spatial
and
network-limited
queries,
Links
This section is non-normative.
To do: The JSONPath subAPI is optional and informative, so it is not appropriate to have RFC assertions here. They will have to be reworded. The JSONPath API MUST allow searching TDs using an HTTP
GET
request
at
/search/jsonpath?query={query}
endpoint,
where
query
is
the
JSONPath
expression.
The
request
MUST
contain
a
valid
JSONPath
[
JSONPATH
]
as
searching
parameter.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
200
(OK)
status,
contain
application/json
Content-Type
header,
and
in
the
body
a
set
of
complete
TDs
or
a
set
of
TD
fragments.
The
syntactic
search
with
JSONPath
is
specified
as
searchJSONPath
action
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
List of errors:
GET
request
at
/search/xpath?query={query}
endpoint,
where
query
is
the
XPath
expression.
The
request
MUST
contain
a
valid
XPath
[
xpath-31
]
as
search
parameter.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
200
(OK)
status,
contain
application/json
Content-Type
header,
and
in
the
body
a
set
of
complete
TDs
or
a
set
of
TD
fragments.
The
syntactic
search
with
XPath
is
specified
as
searchXPath
action
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
List of errors:
GET
requests
at
/search/sparql?query={query}
endpoint,
where
query
is
the
SPARQL
expression.
The
support
for
SPARQL
search
using
HTTP
POST
method
at
/search/sparql
endpoint
is
OPTIONAL
.
UPDATE
queries
are
out
of
the
scope
for
the
API.
A
successful
response
MUST
have
200
(OK)
status,
and
depending
on
the
type
of
query
contain
by
default
as
Content-Type
header
application/ld+json
for
CONSTRUCT
and
DESCRIBE
queries
or
application/json
for
SELECT
or
ASK
.
The
response
body
MAY
contain
TD
fragments
or
a
set
of
TDs
depending
on
the
query.
The
semantic
search
with
SPARQL
is
specified
as
searchSPARQL
action
in
§
8.1
Directory
API
Thing
Description
.
List of errors:
A WoT Thing Description Directory MAY implement federation in its SPARQL query API. If implemented, the SPARQL API MUST implement the SPARQL 1.1 Federated Query standard [ sparql11-overview ].
Minimum security and privacy requirements for confidentiality, authentication, access control, etc.
This section is non-normative.
Security and privacy are cross-cutting issues that need to be considered in all WoT building blocks and WoT implementations. This chapter summarizes some general issues and guidelines to help preserve the security and privacy of concrete WoT discovery implementations. For a more detailed and complete analysis of security and privacy issues, see the WoT Security and Privacy Guidelines specification [ WOT-SECURITY ].
The WoT discovery architecture is designed to avoid a dependence on the security and privacy of existing discovery schemes by using a two-phase approach and requiring authorization before metadata release. However several security and privacy risks still exist. These are listed below along with possible mitigations. The level of risk to privacy in particular depends on the use case and whether there is a risk that information related to a person might be distributed in a fashion inconsistent with the privacy desires of that person. We distinguish the following broad classes of use case scenarios:
All of these in fact carry privacy risks. Even in the case of factory automation, there is the chance that data about employee performance would be captured and would have to be managed appropriately.
With these categories established, we will now discuss some specific risks and potential mitigations.
Certain functions of the directory service, in particular search queries, may require significant resources to execute and this fact can be used to launch DDoS attacks against WoT Thing Description Directory services.
This is mostly of concern in the Service scenario, where the metadata requester is a private individual and the provider is an institution. In some cases this risk may appear in Peer-to-Peer scenarios as well.
A discovery service may potentially allow the approximate location of a person to be determined without their consent. This risk occurs in some specific circumstances which can be avoided or mitigated. It is also similar to the risk posed by other network services such as DHCP and DNS.
For this risk to occur, there first has to be an IoT device that can be reliably associated with a person's location, such as a necessary medical device or a vehicle. Note that the risk only applies to personal use cases, not institutional ones. Secondly, the device has to be configured to register automatically with the nearest directory service. In this case, the location of the device can be inferred from the network range of the directory service and the location of the person inferred from the location of the device.
There are a few variants of this:
Some of these risks are shared by similar services. For example, DCHP automatically responds to requests for IP addresses on a local network, and devices typically provide an identifier (a MAC address) as part of this process, and the DHCP server maintains a registry. In theory, someone with access to the DHCP server in, say, a cafe, could use this information to track someone's phone and infer their location.
Below is a generic Thing Description for the Directory API with OAuth2 security. This specification only covers the HTTP and SSE protocol bindings. Other protocol bindings may be specified in future. The Thing Description alone should not be considered as the reference to implement or interact with a directory. The full specification is available as human-readable text in § 6.2.2 Directory Service API .
{
"@context": [
"http://www.w3.org/ns/td",
"https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/context/discovery-context.jsonld"
],
"@type": "ThingDirectory",
"title": "Thing Description Directory (TDD)",
"version": {
"instance": "1.0.0-alpha"
},
"securityDefinitions": {
"oauth2_code": {
"scheme": "oauth2",
"flow": "code",
"authorization": "https://auth.example.com/authorization",
"token": "https://auth.example.com/token",
"scopes": [
"write",
"read",
"readAll",
"search",
"notification"
]
},
"oauth2_client": {
"scheme": "oauth2",
"flow": "client",
"token": "https://auth.example.com/token",
"scopes": [
"write",
"read",
"readAll",
"search",
"notification"
]
},
"oauth2_device": {
"scheme": "oauth2",
"flow": "device",
"authorization": "https://auth.example.com/device_authorization",
"token": "https://auth.example.com/token",
"scopes": [
"write",
"read",
"readAll",
"search",
"notification"
]
},
"combo_sc": {
"scheme": "combo",
"oneOf": [
"oauth2_code",
"oauth2_client",
"oauth2_device"
]
}
},
"security": "combo_sc",
"base": "https://tdd.example.com",
"properties": {
"things": {
"description": "Retrieve all Thing Descriptions",
"uriVariables": {
"offset": {
"title": "Number of TDs to skip before the page",
"type": "number",
"default": 0
},
"limit": {
"title": "Number of TDs in a page",
"type": "number"
},
"format": {
"title": "Payload format",
"type": "string",
"enum": ["array", "collection"],
"default": "array"
},
"sort_by": {
"title": "Comparator TD attribute for collection sorting",
"type": "string",
"default": "id"
},
"sort_order": {
"title": "Sorting order",
"type": "string",
"enum": ["asc", "desc"],
"default": "asc"
}
},
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things",
"htv:methodName": "GET",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200,
"contentType": "application/ld+json"
},
"scopes": "readAll"
},
{
"href": "/things{?offset,limit,sort_by,sort_order}",
"htv:methodName": "GET",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200,
"contentType": "application/ld+json",
"htv:headers": [
{
"htv:fieldName": "Link"
}
]
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "Invalid query arguments",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "readAll"
}
]
}
},
"actions": {
"createThing": {
"description": "Create a Thing Description",
"uriVariables": {
"id": {
"@type": "ThingID",
"title": "Thing Description ID",
"type": "string",
"format": "iri-reference"
}
},
"input": {
"description": "The schema is implied by the content type",
"type": "object"
},
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things/{id}",
"htv:methodName": "PUT",
"contentType": "application/td+json",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 201
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "Invalid serialization or TD",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "write"
}
]
},
"createAnonymousThing": {
"description": "Create an anonymous Thing Description",
"input": {
"description": "The schema is implied by the content type",
"type": "object"
},
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things",
"htv:methodName": "POST",
"contentType": "application/td+json",
"response": {
"description": "Success response including the system-generated URI",
"htv:headers": [
{
"description": "System-generated URI",
"htv:fieldName": "Location"
}
],
"htv:statusCodeValue": 201
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "Invalid serialization or TD",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "write"
}
]
},
"retrieveThing": {
"description": "Retrieve a Thing Description",
"uriVariables": {
"id": {
"@type": "ThingID",
"title": "Thing Description ID",
"type": "string",
"format": "iri-reference"
}
},
"output": {
"description": "The schema is implied by the content type",
"type": "object"
},
"safe": true,
"idempotent": true,
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things/{id}",
"htv:methodName": "GET",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200,
"contentType": "application/td+json"
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "TD with the given id not found",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 404
}
],
"scopes": "read"
}
]
},
"updateThing": {
"description": "Update a Thing Description",
"uriVariables": {
"id": {
"@type": "ThingID",
"title": "Thing Description ID",
"type": "string",
"format": "iri-reference"
}
},
"input": {
"description": "The schema is implied by the content type",
"type": "object"
},
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things/{id}",
"htv:methodName": "PUT",
"contentType": "application/td+json",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 204
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "Invalid serialization or TD",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "write"
}
]
},
"partiallyUpdateThing": {
"description": "Partially update a Thing Description",
"uriVariables": {
"id": {
"@type": "ThingID",
"title": "Thing Description ID",
"type": "string",
"format": "iri-reference"
}
},
"input": {
"description": "The schema is implied by the content type",
"type": "object"
},
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things/{id}",
"htv:methodName": "PATCH",
"contentType": "application/merge-patch+json",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 204
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "Invalid serialization or TD",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
},
{
"description": "TD with the given id not found",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 404
}
],
"scopes": "write"
}
]
},
"deleteThing": {
"description": "Delete a Thing Description",
"uriVariables": {
"id": {
"@type": "ThingID",
"title": "Thing Description ID",
"type": "string",
"format": "iri-reference"
}
},
"forms": [
{
"href": "/things/{id}",
"htv:methodName": "DELETE",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 204
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "TD with the given id not found",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 404
}
],
"scopes": "write"
}
]
},
"searchJSONPath": {
"description": "JSONPath syntactic search",
"uriVariables": {
"query": {
"title": "A valid JSONPath expression",
"type": "string"
}
},
"output": {
"description": "The schema depends on the given query",
"type": "object"
},
"safe": true,
"idempotent": true,
"forms": [
{
"href": "/search/jsonpath?query={query}",
"htv:methodName": "GET",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"contentType": "application/json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "JSONPath expression not provided or contains syntax errors",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "search"
}
]
},
"searchXPath": {
"description": "XPath syntactic search",
"uriVariables": {
"query": {
"title": "A valid XPath expression",
"type": "string"
}
},
"output": {
"description": "The schema depends on the given query",
"type": "object"
},
"safe": true,
"idempotent": true,
"forms": [
{
"href": "/search/xpath?query={query}",
"htv:methodName": "GET",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"contentType": "application/json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "XPath expression not provided or contains syntax errors",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "search"
}
]
},
"searchSPARQL": {
"description": "SPARQL semantic search",
"uriVariables": {
"query": {
"title": "A valid SPARQL 1.1. query",
"type": "string"
}
},
"output": {
"description": "The schema depends on the given query",
"type": "object"
},
"safe": true,
"idempotent": true,
"forms": [
{
"href": "/search/sparql?query={query}",
"htv:methodName": "GET",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"contentType": "application/json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "SPARQL query not provided or contains syntax errors",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "search"
},
{
"href": "/search/sparql",
"htv:methodName": "POST",
"response": {
"description": "Success response",
"contentType": "application/json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 200
},
"additionalResponses": [
{
"description": "SPARQL query not provided or contains syntax errors",
"contentType": "application/problem+json",
"htv:statusCodeValue": 400
}
],
"scopes": "search"
}
]
}
},
"events": {
"thingCreation": {
"description": "Registration of Thing Descriptions inside the directory",
"uriVariables": {
"diff": {
"description": "Receive the full created TD as event data",
"type": "boolean"
}
},
"data": {
"title": "Partial/Full TD",
"type": "object"
},
"forms": [
{
"op": "subscribeevent",
"href": "/events/create{?diff}",
"subprotocol": "sse",
"contentType": "text/event-stream",
"htv:headers": [
{
"description": "ID of the last event for reconnection",
"htv:fieldName": "Last-Event-ID"
}
],
"scopes": "notification"
}
]
},
"thingUpdate": {
"description": "Updates to Thing Descriptions within the directory",
"uriVariables": {
"diff": {
"description": "Include TD changes inside event data",
"type": "boolean"
}
},
"data": {
"title": "Partial TD",
"type": "object",
"contentMediaType": "application/merge-patch+json"
},
"forms": [
{
"op": "subscribeevent",
"href": "/events/update{?diff}",
"subprotocol": "sse",
"contentType": "text/event-stream",
"htv:headers": [
{
"description": "ID of the last event for reconnection",
"htv:fieldName": "Last-Event-ID"
}
],
"scopes": "notification"
}
]
},
"thingDeletion": {
"description": "Deletion of Thing Descriptions from the directory",
"data": {
"title": "Partial TD",
"type": "object"
},
"forms": [
{
"op": "subscribeevent",
"href": "/events/delete",
"subprotocol": "sse",
"contentType": "text/event-stream",
"htv:headers": [
{
"description": "ID of the last event for reconnection",
"htv:fieldName": "Last-Event-ID"
}
],
"scopes": "notification"
}
]
}
}
}
The scopes may need to be more concrete to able to allow updates but prevent creation.
Need to confirm if equivalent OpenAPI spec can be easily created out of the TD in § 8.1 Directory API Thing Description . If yes, a sentence may be added indicating this possibility.
The context URIs are tentative and subject to change.
The TD defined for a Directory service should really be a Thing Model. We should also "template" the "base" parameter (or omit it, and say it needs to be added when the Thing Model is instantiated).
Since we are talking about a class of things, we should have a Thing Model. However, the definition of Thing Model needs to be updated to allow specifying security scheme templates, form templates (including URL templates giving https), etc.
IANA will be asked to allocate the following value into the Well-Known URI defined in [ RFC8615 ].
wot-thing-description
We
are
currently
discussing
whether
we
should
adopt
a
shorter
URI
suffix
(such
as
wot-td
)
in
view
of
limited
packet
lengths
for
some
protocols.
IANA will be asked to allocate the following value into Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry defined in [ RFC6335 ].
wot
IANA
will
be
asked
to
allocate
the
following
values
into
the
Resource
Type
(
rt=
)
Link
Target
Attribute
Values
sub-registry
of
the
Constrained
Restful
Environments
(CoRE)
Parameters
registry
defined
in
[
RFC6690
].
Value | Description | Reference |
---|---|---|
wot.thing
|
Thing Description of a Thing | § 5.4 CoRE Link Format and CoRE Resource Directory |
wot.directory
|
Directory Description of a Thing Description Directory | § 5.4 CoRE Link Format and CoRE Resource Directory |
DirectoryDescription
identifying
TDs
of
directories
and
a
type
LinkDescription
to
identify
a
TD
that
is
just
a
link
to
another
TD
(useful
for
referring
to
remote
directories
in
order
to
support
federation).
Many thanks to the W3C staff and all other active Participants of the W3C Web of Things Interest Group (WoT IG) and Working Group (WoT WG) for their support, technical input and suggestions that led to improvements to this document.
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in: