[frenchgovtenergydata] Initial contribution

[clinique]

This new binding provides electrical energy prices for the french historical provider EDF.

[lsiepel]

Just did a quickscan, the readme needs some attention, just like the pom.xml (newlines)

[lolodomo]

@clinique : you have a problem with your file bundles/pom.xml.

As already mentioned, README file has to be completed.

I will review your PR.

[clinique]

@clinique : you have a problem with your file bundles/pom.xml.

As already mentioned, README file has to be completed.

I will review your PR.

Thinking of it twice, I wonder if this should not rather be added to Linky binding. Your thoughts @lolodomo ?

[lolodomo]

Thinking of it twice, I wonder if this should not rather be added to Linky binding. Your thoughts @lolodomo ?

@jlaur already created the "Energi Data Service Binding" for Danish prices.
Maybe the binding should be renamed and EDF should only be considered as one provider ? Maybe in the future, we could get the tariffs from other French providers.

[clinique]

Thinking of it twice, I wonder if this should not rather be added to Linky binding. Your thoughts @lolodomo ?

@jlaur already created the "Energi Data Service Binding" for Danish prices. Maybe the binding should be renamed and EDF should only be considered as one provider ? Maybe in the future, we could get the tariffs from other French providers.

Good idea. I do not like the idea of having "edf" providing only this. "Energi Data Service" could become "Energy Data Services" having multiple countries and multiple providers by country.

[lolodomo]

"Energi Data Service" could become "Energy Data Services" having multiple countries and multiple providers by country.

Yes, that is an option. To be discussed with @jlaur.

[clinique]

"Energi Data Service" could become "Energy Data Services" having multiple countries and multiple providers by country.

Yes, that is an option. To be discussed with @jlaur.

Main difference being that in many countries prices can vary a lot, while in France, base is regulated and changes only once or twice a year.

[lolodomo]

Lets think to a different binding name, even if we can keep your current description mentioning EDF.
WDYT of "French Energy Tariffs" ?

[clinique]

Energi Data Service Binding

Renaming a whole binding is not a small change...You kill me. It makes sense. Let's try to do this.

[lolodomo]

First we decide a good name ... before you change everything.

[lolodomo]

Maybe "French Electricity Tariffs"

[clinique]

Maybe "French Electricity Tariffs"

Let's vote for this

[lolodomo]

One remaining comment that I would appreciate if you could consider, and then we can merge.

[lolodomo]

LGTM, thank you

[jlaur]

"Energi Data Service" could become "Energy Data Services" having multiple countries and multiple providers by country.

Yes, that is an option. To be discussed with @jlaur.

I do not agree with this, and in my opinion "French Electricity Tariffs" is also too generic. This is for the same reason you wouldn't merge the Miele and Home Connect bindings which both implement home appliance integrations, but for different vendors and protocols. Energi Data Service is a specific service.

There is a different service available, Eloverblik, which overlaps with EDS in the data provided, but also provides data for energy meters (needs authentication of course). If I were to implement that service, I would also do that in a new binding, org.openhab.binding.eloverblik.

[jlaur]

in my opinion "French Electricity Tariffs" is also too generic

I had a brief look at https://www.data.gouv.fr, and it looks quite similar to Energi Data Service since it provides other data like gas/fuel prices as well. So I think the name is both too generic and too specialized. You wouldn't be able to add support for gas prices with a name like "French Electricity Tariffs", at least it would seem a bit strange? So that would be another binding, "French Gas Prices" implementing basically the same API? What is "EDF" an abbreviation for?

This is just my opinion, and @lolodomo can merge as is, if you both agree on the current name, I just wanted to add my input to the discussion, although you are moving fast. 😉

[lolodomo]

Maybe "French Energy Data Service" ? It is a long name...
But yes, we could then add gas prices in the future for example.
In that case, the thing types should be renamed to include "electricity".

@clinique : WDYT ?

[jlaur]

Maybe "French Energy Data Service" ? It is a long name...

I still think it's misleading unless that's actually the name of the service? It's too generic, there could be other energy-related services in France. Hence:

What is "EDF" an abbreviation for?

Is there a full name that would actually fully represent the service being implemented?

In that case, the thing types should be renamed to include "electricity".

That's a different issue, i.e. the modelling. In EDS binding I used channel groups, so first one is electricity. I didn't see a need to have different Things for the same service, so I went for channel groups. But of course there are multiple ways to structure/model this.

[lolodomo]

French Electricity Tariffs was too much specific while French Energy Data Service is too much generic ?
What do you expect exactly? I am lost.

EDF is the very big company in France that manages electricity in France and the main commercial provider.

What provides this binding today is regulated electricity tariffs only provided by EDF. These tariffs are negociated by EDF with the French government.

[lolodomo]

Maybe "French Electricity Regulated Tariffs" if the goal is to have something very specialized not open to other energy tariffs in the future ?

[jlaur]

French Electricity Tariffs was too much specific while French Energy Data Service is too much generic ?

No, I think both are too generic, but French Electricity Tariffs is also too specialized.

French Electricity Tariffs is too generic because electricity tariffs could be provided by different services, and here the concept/term is used as name rather than the actual/specific service implemented by the binding. And at the same time it's too specialized because it doesn't leave room for other types of data provided by data.gouv.fr - like gas.

French Energy Data Service can include gas and other types of data, but it seems somewhat made up - I mean, it's you calling/naming it an energy data service, right, not EDF? It seems similar to the Danish Energi Data Service, but in the Danish case Energi Data Service is actually the name of the service:

What do you expect exactly? I am lost.

I'm also a little lost. But EDF seems to be the French equivalent to Energinet in Denmark, who is in charge of the grid, and also is the company to provide Energi Data Service.

I think the service in your case is actually named data.gouv.fr? And it's operated by EDF, just like Energi Data Service is operated by Energinet?

France	Denmark
EDF (Électricité de France)	Energinet
data.gouv.fr	Energi Data Service

Is it correctly understood? And is this the logo that could also be used for the binding?

EDIT: Or perhaps:

[lolodomo]

data.gouv.fr is provided by the French government, not EDF.
gouv is for government.

And it provides many different data.

[jlaur]

data.gouv.fr is provided by the French government, not EDF. gouv is for government.

OK. But this is the service implemented by this binding, correct?

[jlaur]

OK. But this is the service implemented by this binding, correct?

My assumption is based on this code line:

private static final String URL = "https://www.data.gouv.fr/fr/datasets/r/%s";

[lolodomo]

data.gouv.fr is kind of portal to deliver many data.
IMHO, the binding name must at least give an idea of what it will provide. data.gouv.fr will give absolutely no indication.

[lolodomo]

French Govt Energy Data ?

[jlaur]

data.gouv.fr is kind of portal to deliver many data.
IMHO, the bonding name must at least give an idea of what it will provide. data.gouv.fr will give absolutely no indication.

Even if it provides only a subset of the available data, wouldn't it still make sense to call it like that, and if there would be any reason to support other datasets, it could be done in context of this binding?

Also think which logo you would use, it might give some kind of direction.

If I would implement another binding for a different API related to French energy data, how would I choose a different name for such a binding? That's part of the reason why I think French Energy Data Service is too generic.

I don't think I have much more to offer. I hope I didn't annoy you too much, just wanted to chip in with another perspective, since you asked me yesterday, and I only got back today. 🙂

[jlaur]

IMHO, the binding name must at least give an idea of what it will provide. data.gouv.fr will give absolutely no indication.

Btw, I think this is quite similar to Energi Data Service: https://www.energidataservice.dk/datasets. Most recently I added #16330.

[lolodomo]

"French Govt Energy Data" shows that it is coming from a French government source and also restricts the binding to energy data.
data.gouv.fr could then be mentioned in binding description.

[lolodomo]

Or we call it "French Govt Data Service" if we expect to provide other data from data.gouv.fr in the future in that binding. Why not.
@clinique WDYT?

[jlaur]

"French Govt Energy Data" shows that it is coming from a French government source and also restricts the binding to energy data. data.gouv.fr could then be mentioned in binding description.

Okay, so I get it, data.gouv.fr also provides data for agriculture, for example, so it's even wider than Energi Data Service in Denmark.

It would probably be reasonable to limit the scope to the energy-related datasets. "data.gouv.fr Energy"? Oh man, this is hard, why did they choose a domain as service name? 😄 I think we are getting closer though.

[lolodomo]

"French Govt Energy Data" looks good.

[clinique]

I believe "French Govt Data Service" is fine and we could use the icon you mentioned.

In that case, I expect things with a clearer link to electricity tariffs.

If we go this way, I think I must also change thing IDs to include 'electricity'

[lolodomo]

@clinique :let's keep it specialized to energy => French Govt Energy Data

But yes thing types should clearly mention electricity.

And mention data.gouv.fr in the binding description.

[lolodomo]

@clinique: I suggest to replace "French Govt Energy Data Binding" by "French Government Energy Data Binding" at the five places it is used (POM, README, feature, addon.xml and properties file), but keeping frenchgovtenergydata as binding name. WDYT ?

[lolodomo]

Thank you Gael.
And thank you also to @jlaur for the discussion about the naming of this binding.