getData() based on managementPointType

[JeroenVdb]

Current getData() works based on embeddedId. Until now I assumed the embeddedId was always one of "climateControl" or "climateControlMainZone". Issue JeroenVdb/homebridge-daikin-cloud#78 points out that the embeddedId can also have other values.

This is also confirmed by the Daikin API documentation: https://b6181f2edaca.eu.portal.konghq.com/docs/b0dffcaa-7b51-428a-bdff-a7c8a64195c0/general_concepts#doc-heading-management-point-overview

A management point bundles a part of the functionality of a Daikin unit. For example, a Daikin unit can have both domestic hot water and climate control functionality. Network gateway functionality is also exposed as a management point.
Examples:1st floor climate control, domestic hot water tank, living room heat pump indoor unit.
In the ONECTA Cloud, a limited number of different management point types, based on the different high-level functionalities, are supported. An overview is given here.

The examples given by Daikin all have different embeddedIds.

I would need to be able to get a management point id by it's type.
Either by having a separate method that gets all managementPoints for a managementPointType.

getManagementPointByType(managementPointType: string) { ... }
// OR
getEmbeddedIdsByManagementPointType(managementPointType: string) { ... }

Or have a second getDataByManagementType() method that chains getData() like

getDataByManagementType(managementPointType: string, dataPoint: any, dataPointPath: any) {
        const embeddedId = ...
        return this.getData(embeddedId, dataPoint, dataPointPath);
    }

One unknown: is it possible that we have multiple management points of the same type? I haven't seen it, nor is it stated in the docs. But I assume that a type can have multiple occurrences. If you would go that way, the first approach would be better I think. In that case applications would first find the embeddedIds they need and then do the getData calls for them.

Let me know what you think, if you want I can do a PR for this.

[Apollon77]

Yes makes sense, if the Types are basically known then we could use an Enum for them?