[energidataservice] Provide example configuration for YAML

[jlaur]

Based on documentation: https://next.openhab.org/docs/configuration/yaml.html

[jlaur]

@lolodomo - I noticed that type is required here for a configured channel, not a custom channel:

    channels:
      electricity#grid-tariff:
        type: datahub-price
        config:
          chargeTypeCodes: "CD,CD R"
          start: StartOfYear

whereas it can be omitted in DSL:

    Channels:
        Number : electricity#grid-tariff [ chargeTypeCodes="CD,CD R", start="StartOfYear" ]

I don't know if this was already discussed and decided, just wanted to let you know in case not, since I'm trying this out now for the first time and seeing it with new eyes. 🙂

[lolodomo]

@jlaur : in your case, you don't need to set the "type" field but the "itemType" field to value "Number".

[jlaur]

in your case, you don't need to set the "type" field but the "itemType" field to value "Number".

Thanks, that worked as well. I didn't think of this much before, but it seems itemDimension is not needed, it's still EnergyPrice as defined for the channel type being configured. In the DSL syntax, I just added "Number : " to make it work (I guess), but with the YAML syntax it's now obvious that specifying either channel type or item type seems redundant? Since my only interest is to provide some parameters for configuring channel electricity#grid-tariff.

[lolodomo]

I didn't think of this much before, but it seems itemDimension is not needed, it's still EnergyPrice as defined for the channel type being configured. In the DSL syntax, I just added "Number : " to make it work (I guess), but with the YAML syntax it's now obvious that specifying either channel type or item type seems redundant? Since my only interest is to provide some parameters for configuring channel electricity#grid-tariff.

When the channel type is specificied, the accepted item type is retrieved from the channel type.
In case we would accept to declare a channel without neither a channel type nor an item type, the channel will be created without any accepted item type. This will be accepted as the parameter is nullable but this will more than probably have an impact, maybe in UI when the user tries to link an item and maybe when handling commands for this channel ? I am not sure if the core framework and UI is really prepared to handle channels without any accepted item type.

[jlaur]

In case we would accept to declare a channel without neither a channel type nor an item type, the channel will be created without any accepted item type.

My thinking is that this should be derived from the channel being configured, i.e. this should be possible:

    channels:
      electricity#grid-tariff:
        config:
          chargeTypeCodes: "CD,CD R"
          start: StartOfYear

or:

    Channels:
        electricity#grid-tariff [ chargeTypeCodes="CD,CD R", start="StartOfYear" ]

I didn't test the DSL version, probably it won't parse the syntax validation.

Just a thought, and obvously not related to this PR. It just feels strange having to either provide channel type or item type when both are redundant and could (at least theoretically) be derived from the channel being configured.

[lolodomo]

LGTM, thank you