Hey, I'm not saying that I'm about to merge such a change but I think this is a reasonable think todo. If we all agree on it I'll file an Issue on jira and try to do it myself the next weeks.
But good point with docs and examples! J Am 16.07.19, 10:11 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <[email protected]>: 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
