Removing the "duration" reading type from AMON 1.0.

[Andrew Hill]

Hi all,

Based on feedback received outside of this forum, the "duration" reading type is not relevant at all to device manufacturers, as readings are invariably created with a single timestamp (i.e. the date and time the reading was made), and that a reading based on a defined interval (i.e. with a known, specific start date/time and end date/time) are simply not needed.

On that basis, I would like to propose that we deprecate the "duration" reading type in AMON 1.0.

Are there any objections to this?

[Andrew Hill]

On the basis that no-one has objected, we will deprecate the "duration" reading type as part of AMON 2.0.

(AMEE is planning to skip AMON 1.0 in favour of AMON 2.0 to make life easier for users of the AMEE implementation of AMON, as we can keep the version number of AMON in sync with the API implementation version.)

[Andrew Hill]

Actually, there has been some discussion of the deprecation of the "duration" style meter at https://github.com/AMEE/AMON/issues/4 .

I've suggested we move that discussion to here, though.

For AMON 2.0, the "duration" style meter will be deprecated, as this has already been coded in the standard and the AMEE API, however, if there is a real need for duration style measurements (especially with regards to pulse readings) then we can always add support back into the standard for AMON 3.0....

[Andrew Hill]

In fact, after much debate and discussion, we agree that a "duration" type is essential to the way the AMEE implementation of the AMON standard works! So, we will not be deprecating the "duration" type. Expect to see it restored to AMON in v2.1.