RE: Renaming of instances and SubInstances?

[Ian B]

Hi Kevin

>I think you need to send a message for each UID - this is because
something
>could be watching for the UID to change state ( based only on the
>source UID
>)- so two message should go out in succession.

OK - so a worst case scenario for me would be 8 single body messages going
out in succession.

> > When more than one changes state do I have multiple
> > pairs in the body i.e. 'SubInstance name=new state' repeating or
> > multiple messages.

>Again - that was what I too asked in the adjacent Topic 1 thread -
>there are
>two possible ways of doing it - multiple names within one body or
multiple
>body parts - I sort of favour the multiple body parts as it allows
>an easier
>way of spanning two messages together, and it fits in with James' usage
in
>say the news xAP - and you prefer the single body - anyone else any
views
>here ??

This is contradictory to your first answer above? If I have sent up to 8
individual change of status messages then there is no need for either a
multi body message of multiple pairs in a single body message. Or have I
got
the wrong end of the stick?

Thanks

Ian

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kevin Hawkins [mailto:<a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=7pc5PD6-dKrFORj1ZHUA5LtLbXSZLFSttq5ZXzz7CHkE69jT9a0pZDq-pDHAxdVMnjOUy6OptvOiBwTHLDNmSfQ">lists@u...</a>]
>Sent: 31 August 2003 17:56
>To: <a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=miTMbl46IjbWJ-v_pQDfuVrDoeELWSlndfp5CxpIWxtcScRkl2pQKsFdtbTFqNYtnps4O_N7mKL0uFmboadH57BEmy3v">xAP_developer@xxxxxxx</a>
>Subject: RE: [xAP_developer] Renaming of instances and SubInstances?
>
>
>Hi Ian...
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ian B
> >
> > OK, I have my relays reporting a change of state now be it from a
> > command
> > which sets one on etc. or a timer expiring.
>
>Sounds good...
> >
> > Now, the question is:
> > When more than one relay changes state at the same time from
either
> > timers
> > expiring, a wildcard command or a direct set command that sets
all of
> > them
> > at once what do I use in the UID?
>
>I think you need to send a message for each UID - this is because
something
>could be watching for the UID to change state ( based only on the
>source UID
>)- so two message should go out in succession.
>
>Whether there should also be a message sent out on the '00' UID that
>contains a list of the channels that have changed state is really the
same
>issue that I raised in the adjacent thread - no-one seems to have a
view on
>that ;-)
>
> >
> > Secondly and related. When more than one changes state do I have
> > multiple
> > pairs in the body i.e. 'SubInstance name=new state' repeating or
> > multiple
> > messages. I don't want to have multiple body messages.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
>Again - that was what I too asked in the adjacent Topic 1 thread -
>there are
>two possible ways of doing it - multiple names within one body or
multiple
>body parts - I sort of favour the multiple body parts as it allows
>an easier
>way of spanning two messages together, and it fits in with James' usage
in
>say the news xAP - and you prefer the single body - anyone else any
views
>here ??
>
> >
> > I have also altered the changing of the SubInstance names so only
one
> > can be
> > done at once and there can not be any duplicates. I have declared
the
> > UID
> > last two digits as 01 to 08 for the outputs and 09 to 16 or 24
(but in
> > hex
> > of course) for the inputs depending how many are fitted. 00 - not
sure
> > about
> > this one but really it is the instance reporting i.e. a heartbeat
or
> > for
> > status messages.
>
>I think that makes sense - the '00' UID is really the whole device or
the
>xAP application - as such it should report things related to the whole
>device - maybe when two things change state a message should go out
from
>each one - but the message from the '00' sub instance should give a
status
>update for all of the I/O possibly - a sort of summary ??
>
> K
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Ian
> >