The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Topic 1: Base Level Status Schema


  • Subject: Topic 1: Base Level Status Schema
  • From: Kevin Hawkins
  • Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 18:15:00 +0000

This is a thread to discuss the definition of a base level schema for
minimalist / legacy type HA devices.

As I see it most existing HA controllers (hardware or software) are
based around making logical decisions in their programmatic actions based
on
examining an internally maintained state table for a device. The prevalence
of X10 has created a typical ON/OFF/LEVEL model for this. For xAP to be
retrofitted in to existing controller applications and devices it would
seem
sensible that we define a base level that supports fundamental state
information for basic devices allowing logical decisions to be made within
the existing macro language of the device.

To start the ball rolling I have the following STATE suggestions

ON  OFF  UNKNOWN  NA (not applicable)

And also for LEVEL expressed as a percentage eg 20% 88.3% or again UNKNOWN
or NA

xAPStatus
{
State=ON
Level=50%
}

xAPStatus
(
State=ON
Level=NA
)


I actually struggle to see what more information is generic enough
to be included.

We must also address the issue of a Status response from a xAPp that
has several outputs - which should, if it adheres to the spec contain
several hardware sub addresses and also alter it's UID for each separate
I/O
end point (or terminal). It's clear that if we target a specific output end
point (which currently is only possible via addressing not UID) then a
status response relates directly to one terminal and the above scenario
works - what should happen when a status request is sent to the xAP itself
-
one that may have several I/O ports that it services. Clearly I think the
device should respond with the state of all of it's inputs and outputs but
should it do this with one body or should it split each into a separate
body
somehow identified through the header or perhaps issue multiple xAP
messages
one for each I/O ?? This has a ramification on how tidy and basic we can
make a basic status schema.

Kevin








xAP_Development Main Index | xAP_Development Thread Index | xAP_Development Home | Archives Home

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.