Re: Addressing vs sub-adressing... and vendorid

["Kevin Hawkins" <yahoogroupskh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

--- In xAP_developer@xxxxxxx, "Patrick Giasson"
<patrick.giasson.maillinglist@...> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I have a Tini and began to serioulsy think of using it for 1-wire to
> XAP connector (yes, I began thinking of that more than a year ago,
> but this time it's serious ;-).

Welcome back Patrick

> Is a naming scheme like
> elperepat.sensor.livingroom a correct one? Is "sensor" too
broad?

The idea is that the 'device' portion describes the 'type' of the
device , as such sensor is fine although you might prefer something
more specific eg 1sensor or something.  The last portion defines the
specific instance of that device often the location as you have done.
If there were two such devices they need to be different here.

>
> From what I understand of the TSC Schema, addressing could be
> something like:
>
> elperepat.sensor.outdoor:temperature
>
> Is it ok to use subadressing (:temperature) if the sensor only
> returns one value?

Yes - each endpoint should have a sub address - if there is only one
endpoint then using one sub address is fine.  In actuality you would
have two UID's in use - the whole device (ending 00) and the single
temperature endpoint probably ending 01.

>
> Suppose I have a DS2438 which can can return temperature as well as
> humidity. I think I can use an addressing scheme as:
>
> elperepat.sensor.livingroom:temperature
> elperepat.sensor.livingroom:humidity

Yes you can, they can be sensors within one device or two separate
1-wire devices atatched to the one Tini and
should you prefer you could move the room further down the hierarchy by

elperepat.sensor.master:livingroom.humidity
elperepat.sensor.master:livingroom.temperature

Using the latter if you attached two temperature sensors in different
rooms to one Tini
controller they would have different sub addresses
elperepat.sensor.master:hall.temperature



>
> I want to separate the 1-wire architecture from the 1-wire adressing,
> and that's the whole interrogation I have: is it a good idea? Suppose
> I want to do the same thing as above, but using a DS18B20 (temp) and
> a DS2450 (ADC for humidity) in the same "plastic box". Is it
ok to
> use the same addressing, :temperature and :humidity, even though they
> are not the same physical (1-wire) device?

Yes - the address segments to the left of the : are the whole device
(the Tini)
and to the right are endpoints on that one device .

>
> By opposition, if I want to use an ADC channel of the DS2450 for
> humidity and one for something completly unrelated and/or not in the
> same location. Would it be ok to separate the channels across
> different address (not using subadressing), ie:
>
> elperepat.sensor.livingroom:humidity (ChannelA)
> elperepat.sensor.outdoor:luminosity (ChannelB)

These would be two distinct devices ie two separate Tinis. You can use
any number of hierarchies to the left or right of the : to suit

source= A.B.C.D.E:F.G.H.I   although for string space reasons and ease
of wildcarding I would keep them short

Using the previous examples you can ask for all values in your
LivingRoom by sending a query to

Target= *.*.LivingRoom:*.>
or
Target=>:LivingRoom.>

although you might want to further narrow this down using say

target=elerepat.sensor.*:LivingRoom.>
or widen to all your sensors everywhere by
target=*.sensor.*:*.>


>
> or should I avoid doing that?
>
>
>
>
> Ah, and while I'm here, I'd like to ask for elperepat as vendorid, if
> possible.

Done

Kevin