Move dtmi to public header

[danewalton-msft]

The parsing APIs are developed to be hardcoded for a specific version of the DTMI. If the DTMI were to change, our underlying parsing would also have to change. I see no reason why we shouldn't make this public, since users can then reference it in their own published DTMI (and not have to create this string themselves).

For example, in the middleware sample, I don't see a reason why the user should have to provide this string. We should make this available to them to use.

https://github.com/Azure-Samples/iot-middleware-freertos-samples/blob/aa3d65a6e930062319bc4802d7cc1a00d0169570/demos/sample_azure_iot_adu/sample_azure_iot_adu.c#L216-L219

[CIPop]

Left one comment but I don't have strong feelings either way.

[danewalton-msft]

/check-enforcer evaluate

[jspaith]

Just so I understand scenario, this is so that an application can pass in AZ_IOT_ADU_CLIENT_AGENT_INTERFACE_ID when registering an interface ModelId, correct? So it's a convenience to them to avoid them duplicating this since they'd need anyway?

In this case the change makes sense. And I think not having it be configurable is best since as you said customer cannot change this to like version2 and expect anything to work since there'd need to be .c changes.

[danewalton-msft]

Just so I understand scenario, this is so that an application can pass in AZ_IOT_ADU_CLIENT_AGENT_INTERFACE_ID when registering an interface ModelId, correct? So it's a convenience to them to avoid them duplicating this since they'd need anyway?

In this case the change makes sense. And I think not having it be configurable is best since as you said customer cannot change this to like version2 and expect anything to work since there'd need to be .c changes.

Perfect yes this is exactly right. The DTMI is tied closely to how we parse the document. The only way customers would want this to change is if someone wants to extend it (or have it as a subcomponent in the future), in which case people are able to use this as a base or actually have in their DTMI itself. But the core of our parsing is still based on this value.

[danewalton-msft]

/check-enforcer evaluate

[danewalton-msft]

/azp run c - client - ci

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).