I am also in favor for changing it.
I'm however a little unsure about the ads. But as the adsid can be completely
different, pehaps it would be a good idea to do something like: ams://{hostname
or ip} for cases where the ads I'd is created from the ip by adding ".1.1" and
using ams://{hostname or ip}?AdsId=1.2.3.4.5.6
So +1 for that change... But be sure to not only update the code, but also
documentation and examples.
Chris
Holen Sie sichOutlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
________________________________
From: Markus Sommer <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 9:08:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: AW: [DISCUSS] change connection string format
Hello, everyone,
if we change the connection string, we should do it now, not in 2-3 years. Now
the users will forgive us for changing the interface.
I am in favour of changing the connection string.
Markus
Freundliche Grüße
Markus Sommer
Geschäftsführer
isb innovative software businesses GmbH
Otto-Lilienthal-Strasse 2
D - 88046 Friedrichshafen
Tel.: +49 (0) 7541 3834-14
Mob: +49 (0) 171 537 8437
Fax: +49 (0) 7541 3834-20
E-Mail: [email protected]
Web: www.isb-fn.de<http://www.isb-fn.de>
Geschäftsführer: Markus Sommer, Thomas Zeler
Sitz: Friedrichshafen
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Ulm HRB-Nr. 631624
Important Note: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain
trade secrets and may well also be legally privileged or otherwise protected
from disclosure. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its
status.
Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete his e-mail and any
attachment from your system. If you are not the intended recipient please
understand that you must not copy this e-mail or any attachments or disclose
the contents to any other person. Thank you.
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Julian Feinauer <[email protected]>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Juli 2019 09:05
An: Strljic, Matthias Milan <[email protected]>;
[email protected]
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] change connection string format
Hey Matthias,
Personally, I feel that it would be better for users to keep fields "domain"
specific.
At least I love that for S7 (and our users too).
Perhaps we can introduce also a general unified language for that but
optionally provide a specific one for each protocol.
What do others think?
Julian
Am 16.07.19, 09:02 schrieb "Strljic, Matthias Milan"
<[email protected]>:
Hi Julian,
I think that is a really good question.
For the Connection String I would agree (+1) for your suggestion. But
wanted to ask if there is a notation which is domain specific to a protocol
from the "user" point of view?
Like we have it in the FieldAddresses.
So that we just throw into a discussion about a neutral PLC4X definition or
a domain centered one (which should also include a guideline)?
For Connection Strings my opionion would follow yours @Julian Feinauer.
+1 for Camel Style
Greetings
Matthias Strljic, M.Sc.
Universität Stuttgart
Institut für Steuerungstechnik der Werkzeugmaschinen und
Fertigungseinrichtungen (ISW)
Seidenstraße 36
70174 Stuttgart
GERMANY
Tel: +49 711 685-84530
Fax: +49 711 685-74530
E-Mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.isw.uni-stuttgart.de
-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Feinauer <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2019 10:05 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [DISCUSS] change connection string format
Hi all,
Currently we have no fixed rules on how a connection string should look
like and everybody has its own regrex (except for the first part).
This is bad from a stylistic point of view but also leads to confusion like
with PLC4X-134 [1].
I suggest to take the schema used in apache Camel which is oriented at url
/ urn, see [2].
This allows
- central parsing
-more efficient handling of missing parameters -default values -its a
standard!
What do others think?
Julian
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLC4X-134
[2] https://camel.apache.org/how-do-i-configure-endpoints.html
Von meinem Mobiltelefon gesendet
