Re: TSC.cmd / id

[Kevin Hawkins <yahoogroupskh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Per

I think you have two sensors reporting here , channel 0 and 1 ,
although both are possibly within the same physical device.  Best for
TSC  if each sensor had a unique UID - and then the sub address would
perforce also be different for each , and so would the ID e.g ID=ABCD
ID=ABCE ... or ABCD01 ABCD02 or whatever

You can't include two identically named blocks within one xAP message
either so as a rule these would have to be indexed as below

info.state.1
info.state.2   etc

However the BSC and TSC schema do not require (or support) duplicate
blocknames so if you create separate sub addresses for these endpoints
they would then be sent as separate messages

presence.status is not a defined part of the TSC schema either but could
be included should you wish  (as you can supplement whatever custom
blocks you like) but these might be better presented as an additional
xAP schema/message of your own design.

Late night Saturday work eh...  most impressed :-) - my comments are
post several wine bottles of wine and a party  so I hope they are valid.

cheers  K

parameterPer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm a bit confused regarding the mandatory ID pair in the TSC.cmd
body.
>
> Based on the following xAP message, what would be the correct ID value
to set the latch on channel 1 to False be? I'd say ABCD, but that'd be four
characters and the spec limits it to two.
>
> Maybe I've missunderstood the sub addressing rules?
>
> xap-header
> {
> v=13
> hop=1
> Source=MSure.xAPGateway.Bigboy:D100000003AE661F
> Uid=FF.000001:ABCD
> Class=TSC.info
> }
> info.state
> {
> Channel=0
> ActivityDetected=True
> DetectedLevel=True
> LatchState=False
> DateTime=20091121233600
> }
> info.state
> {
> Channel=1
> ActivityDetected=True
> DetectedLevel=True
> LatchState=True
> DateTime=20091121233600
> }
> presence.status
> {
> connected=True
> }
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>



------------------------------------