Re: Addressing vs sub-adressing

["Patrick Giasson" <patrick.giasson.maillinglist@xxxxxxxxx>]

> >
> > 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 .

Oh, I wanted the tini to be transparent too:

I was thinking of the left side "virutal devices" made of 1-wire
chips and the right side as groups of output from such virtual
devices.

My blind controls are made of a PCB with a DS2408 and a DS2405. They
work as a single unit and would prefer not see the physical Dallas
chips appear on the XAP.

A DS2408 (1-wire chip with 8 I/O lines) could also be used as 8
distinct subaddresses in another use behind the same tini.

Finally, I'd sometime like to "split" a Dallas chip in two by
adressing it through 2 XAP addresses (two locations).



Example:

The 1-wire network behind the tini will be full of different devices
like window blinds, lcd displays, temperature sensors, etc. I though
of making the software in the tini route xap requests of different
addresses into the 1-wire transparently. Is it something
"allowed":

elperepat.blind.southeastwindow
elperepat.display.bedroom
elperepat.sensor.outdoor:temperature


That's the way I thought to address the devices from the example
above. They would all route through the tini to the 1-wire network.


I know it'll be something large, but it would be so versatile. Also,
at the price at which devices like tini are, I'd prefer having them
do as much as possible.


Patrick