RE: Renaming of instances and SubInstances?

[Kevin Hawkins]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian B [mailto:<a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=F8pywy4SvS6zV99VB1JMiSKX8OYMkvmJJqURI_I8RhSXAs5y-xYxt28yqGSnfqZqxtzlLJ9mKqV-pMU">Ian@M...</a>]
> Sent: 31 August 2003 19:27
> To: <a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=Ab1jMAvWSL3TtIKh9NTz-6SmGddGAlomFpYvqHb79kiVzCS_seUka2fsO5qyvYxn2qh3SWf_TBhIvHMXBI01PWqDew">xAP_developer@xxxxxxx</a>
> Subject: RE: [xAP_developer] Renaming of instances and SubInstances?
>
> 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.

Yep - I do think the single messages are important - and although you might
need to send 8 it is really only a loop - actually there could be more
because if for example a combination of inputs caused all the outputs to
change state then you would be reporting all the inputs that changed and
all
the outputs too.

>
> > > 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?

It's the topic that I raised in the adjacent thread 'Topic 1' - there are
two related things here basically

1) What happens when something changes state - and

2) How do we report 'status' in a way that everybody can standardise on.

The latter may not be as a result of anything changing state but could be
just a periodic update message that went out every 15 mins say or more
likely would be in response to another 'request for status' xAP message.

Hence something like HomeSeer (at launch) would send a tragetted 'request
for status' message (to the whole device) and could then know the state of
all that devices inputs &amp; outputs, returned in one message; it
could then
track the individual state change messages and from time to time verify
it's
internal model by issuing another status request should it want. My
rationale was that a request for status sent to the '00' UID (effectively
the whole device) should return a status message for all the inputs and
outputs - whereas if you targeted a specific output (UID) then you were
only
asking about that one output. Whether it was one body with several names or
several bodies was for discussion as was this issue of whether a device
should send a compound response 'at all' for all it's I/O or make do with
many single responses. I think the individual responses are quite key as
they allow simple devices to know when something changes state just by
monitoring the UID.
If there is seen to be a usefulness for the compound response from
the device (where it lists all it's I/O in one message) then it would seem
logical that it should send this whenever something changed too. I do like
the tidiness of this compound response.

Kevin



>
> Thanks
>
> Ian
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Kevin Hawkins [mailto:<a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=7RGtI7HffdJkBBThiGW7DZTMszcR9i5tAOgN6UYP8RGaICYSshNTflqwNdhHG13r3xPZnW5pwtULZa3Xlkvfj44l">lists@u...</a>]
> >Sent: 31 August 2003 17:56
> >To: <a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=Ab1jMAvWSL3TtIKh9NTz-6SmGddGAlomFpYvqHb79kiVzCS_seUka2fsO5qyvYxn2qh3SWf_TBhIvHMXBI01PWqDew">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
> > >
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
---------------------~--
> >
> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
> Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US
&amp;
> Canada. <a href="http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511";>http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511</a>
> <a href="http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/dpFolB/TM";>http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/dpFolB/TM</a>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~-
> >
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> <a
href="/group/xAP_developer/post?postID=_2t3Gwv9yjCukE-LuWgReD_vhgAy3jhRYahiczNKqwkAibJbRdWfoDr4w6E7bKCZuN-cG2tRTuUuc6urabbdzyKutDcPANdLfowvFHbW3gxx">xAP_developer-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx</a>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a>