Possible integration with IS-11 Stream Compatibility Management

[garethsb]

See #17.

An issue with this approach, simply adding another base path for e.g. /streamcompatibility to the Annotation API, is that at the moment the Annotation API is scoped/advertised as a Node 'service' endpoint, whereas the Stream Compatibility Management API is scoped/advertised as a Device 'control', and it doesn't feel quite right to have the annotations for an API at a different scope...

[peterbrightwell]

Update 2023-06-01:

We need to resolve by end of iteration whether (a) we want support for SCM endpoints here and (b) whether it can be done in a v1.1.

Annotation API is currently advertised on a per-node basis. Should it be per-device for consistency with other APIs?

[peterbrightwell]

Update 2023-07-13: we would appreciate @AMWA-TV/nmos-architecture-review input on this issue re relationship between IS-11 and also advertise device controls via a node-based API. WA is that we wouldn't be doing this at least in current scope.

[peterbrightwell]

If we do this for IS-11 would the same argument apply to annotations on other device-oriented specs such as IS-08?

[peterbrightwell]

Also (spotted by @cristian-recoseanu ): what if there is >1 device in the node -- the draft PR doesn't currently indicate which device(s)