The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

The UKHA-ARCHIVE IS CEASING OPERATIONS 31 DEC 2024


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re: [Project] Kbd/LCD device


  • To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: Re: [Project] Kbd/LCD device
  • From: Ant Skelton <ant@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:02:38 +0100
  • Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
  • Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
  • Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
  • References: <9fdl64+qkvo@xxxxxxx>
  • Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx



Dr John Tankard wrote:
>
> The main problem with the LCD project is I was thinking it would be a
> bit more powerfull than a dumb terminal...some on the list like the
idea of centeral
> controler...I like the security of knowing the house will not crash
> if one device fails.

The design I am proposing would cater for both camps - you can still
keep the UI element logically separate from the control element, even if
they are physically on the same device.

> There are already LCD/KBD dumb terminals available if you wnat to go
> down that route.

Erm, that's hardly the point though is it? Just about everything
discussed here is currently commercially available, including lighting
controllers and cat5 transceivers. I thought the idea was to develop an
open and coherently integrated system? Something which can be
sufficiently flexible to address the needs of most users here, and which
can be built at cost.

> >From my stand point the LCD/KBD is not ditched its just posponed

What I'm trying to get across is that by designing each device in a
modular way, each component of the design can be crafted to encapsulate
only sufficient functionality to do its job. Taking the LCD module as an
example again, the low level transport protocol and software can be
worked on independently of the UI architecture and back-end control
system, so there's no reason the two projects can't be run in parallel.

Of course, in an ideal world, the control protocol would come first; it
is the common language by which all these devices would communicate, and
ought to be agreed before any hardware is built or software written.
What's SNAP like these days? Has anybody looked at it recently? I
reviewed a very early draft a while back, and it had significant holes
in it, but I'm guessing they've had plenty of time to sort it out.


cheers

ant
--
/\/\
ant@xxxxxxx                   (`')                  www.ant.org
()
Megawatt Winged Avenger



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Comments to the Webmaster are always welcomed, please use this contact form . Note that as this site is a mailing list archive, the Webmaster has no control over the contents of the messages. Comments about message content should be directed to the relevant mailing list.