Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Re: Re: One way BSC ?
It's a bit of a smart-arse response, but I think the clue is in the
name - Basic Status AND Control, not Basic Status OR Control.
On 4 January 2011 14:25, Brett England <brett@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'd have to agree with you on this one. =A0Either implement the BSC
in its entirety or create your own class - don't just implement that bits
hat you need and call it a day.
> --- In xap_automation@xxxxxxx, Kevin Hawkins <yahoogroupskh@...>
>> =A0 I've noticed a couple of =A0xAP devices /applications
>> implementing BSC as senders only , either just being lazy or
>> they have no receive capability and hence can not respond to a
>> xapbsc.query or xapbsc.cmd. =A0 These report their input states
>> xAPBSC.info / xAPBSC.event =A0as it is so pervasively supported.
>> Some of these are of necessity senders only as they are bridging
>> another schema or even protocol, =A0for example xPL, which lacks
>> for UID's , =A0sub addressing and the wildcard constructs xAP BSC
>> Some applications with inbuilt bridging implement =A0this mapping
>> 1 way BSC.
>> My immediate reaction was that such '1-way' devices don't meet the
>> specification and hence must not use BSC - i.e. BSC if implemented
>> be bidirectional. =A0I looked up the BSC spec and it reads that
>> schema classes should be implemented. =A0How do others feel ?
>> should allow (identify) an inputs only =A0'1 way' version of BSC
>> =A0 =A0 Kevin
>> PS =A0For those wanting a good solution HouseBot allows creating
>> xAP BSC endpoints and also =A0bridging schema as it maintains a
>> bidirectional endpoint and can be scripted to schema translate.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
Escape to the country! Our characterful cottage in Cornwall is
available for holidays and short breaks.=A0www.bakecottage.co.uk
xAP_Automation Main Index |
xAP_Automation Thread Index |
xAP_Automation Home |