[AID] Handling of semantic annotations #54
Conversation
Co-authored-by: danielpeintner <[email protected]>
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #54 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 65.23% 65.99% +0.76%
==========================================
Files 1 1
Lines 558 594 +36
Branches 224 231 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 364 392 +28
- Misses 155 162 +7
- Partials 39 40 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
I have fixed the failing test, the assumption based code and adding the new test now |
|
I think the code looks much better now and I hope we can step-by-step answer some of the TODOs in the source code. |
I was still working on them :D I have added test specifically targeting the semantics conversion. EDIT: I have no idea why the JSON Schema validation fails. So it is commented out now. Maybe @Kaz040 has an idea? |
I will look at it @egekorkan . Can you please send me the TD you are using for testing and the converted AID? |
The validation fails because of "myPrefix1_suffix4" term that was converted. The schema does not accept terms that are not defined in AID specification. The terms that are defines are mostly TD terms and protocol binding terms (HTTP,Modbus, and MQTT). TD: AID: |
| console.log("###\n\n" + JSON.stringify(smObj) + "\n\n###"); | ||
| // const isValid = this.validateAID(smObj); | ||
| // expect(isValid.valid, isValid.errors).to.equal(true); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove console log and commented code?
| }, | ||
| base: "http://example.com:3003", | ||
| security: ["nosec_sc"], | ||
| "myPrefix2:suffix3": "value1", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not part of the test?
| myProperty1: { | ||
| type: "number", | ||
| title: "Property Title", | ||
| "myPrefix1:suffix4": "myPrefix2:value4", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't really understand the idea/system/schema behind the attached numbers but it is fine by me
If a TD has a semantic annotation, it is simply ignored in the conversion. This PR adds a basic support in this direction. I am not exactly satisfied since there can be many corner cases. The worst is if there is an additional context without a prefix. That would mean looking into the context for each possible unknown key. I have added a good amount of comments in the code but also adding now some in the PR review.