[edderly]

If memory is a concern why are you trying to send JSON to a memory limited device?

[kaspar030]

The used protocol was part of the requirements, so the existing web service could be re-used.

[edderly]

Yeah, a common stupid requirement. Perhaps a selling point for any solution would be to deploy a common serialization/de-serialization package that can be used on both the cloud and end point side.

[torginus]

Why? In IoT stuff, its very useful if you can talk to your devices via standard internet protocols, otherwise you have to introduce some pointless 'gateway' node for that.

I mean sometimes efficiency matters a lot, but a lot of other times, interoperability is more important.

Text based IO with microcontrollers over tty has been quite a standard thing even decades ago.

[edderly]

Interoperability would mean you have a meaningful protocol encoded within JSON. JSON itself offers little value.

[torginus]

From the paper:

> The command-response protocol and binary data format are described in device models generated using DTDLv2 [10], a JSON-based language for describing digital twins. These models are used within the Azure IoT Plug and Play (PnP) framework [11], which STAIoTCraft adopts for datalogging