RE: Wildcarding query

["Ian B" <ian.bird@xxxxxxxxx>]

For what it is worth my understanding of all this is the same as Kevin's I
think. I do agree it can get horribly complicated with the '*' and '>'
and
the ':'. If it can be simplified this would be a good thing.

In my rather limited apps I definitely do not consider the colon equal to a
dot. I think this would be wrong and potentially dangerous as far as
processing a message is concerned.

Otherwise extensive explained (step by step) examples are needed as we can
see from the number of interpretations seen so far.

Ian

>-----Original Message-----
>From: James [mailto:james@xxxxxxx]
>Sent: 22 December 2004 21:16
>To: xAP_developer@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [xAP_developer] Wildcarding query
>
>
>
>
>> Now I know James for example believes an untargeted packet
>>and a target=>:> packet should be treated the same.  My
simple view is a
>>target=>.> says 'please try and process/action this message
if you can'
>>and for me targetless messages does not carry this meaning, they
are
>>informational.  As we have two scenarios that effectively look the
same
>>it seems sensible to utilise them to different advantage. But my
view
>>could be wrong here. Being able to ignore untargeted messages is
very
>>useful for me, I believe E does this too ?
>>
>My reasoning here is that a standard xAP message is for everyone.
>Targeting is simply a method of narrowing down the audience. I think of
>it as pure binary function, it's either a message for me or not. As
>KevinT mentioned targeting can be just as useful for Info type messages
>as for commands. A command is down to the schema, targetting or lack
>there of should have no real context to the function of a message, it
>should just specify if the postman will deliver it or not.
>I do think that a > should cover every thing up to the : , so a
message
>sent to > would only go to device with a uid ending in 00. To get a
>message to go every where either have no target or target to >:>
.
>I think the danger here, with targets, is that schema will become
>overley complicated where exactly the same message will have a
different
>function based on target. I just want to keep addressing and function
>seperate.
>
>David, on BSC and wildcards. You can set the id=* within a BSC13
message
>and then wildcard using the target so it's not quite a simple as saying
>BSC=no wildcarding.  In fact in alot of functions where i use BSC I
just
>use the target to specify the message destination and just keep the
id=*
>as it is a much simpler process to deal with.
>
>James
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>