I was just wondering how the other LTK implementations (perl, c/c++) handle some of the constraints mentioned in the spec which are not captured in llrpdef.xml? For example:
>From the LLRP Specification 1.0 10.2.1 ROSpec Parameter ..... ROSpecID: Unsigned Integer, 0 is an illegal ROSpecID for a ROSpec. Priority: Integer. Possible Values: 0-7 ..... >From llrpdef.xml 405 <parameterDefinition name="ROSpec" typeNum="177"> 406 <annotation> 407 <documentation> 408 reference 10.2.1 and 16.2.4.1 409 </documentation> 410 </annotation> 411 <field type="u32" name="ROSpecID"/> 412 <field type="u8" name="Priority"/> 413 <field type="u8" name="CurrentState" 414 enumeration="ROSpecState"/> 415 <parameter repeat="1" type="ROBoundarySpec"/> 416 <choice repeat="1-N" type="SpecParameter"/> 417 <parameter repeat="0-1" type="ROReportSpec"/> 418 </parameterDefinition> Are you leaving this kind of constraint checking to the "application level"? -- Christian Floerkemeier Auto-ID Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology phone: +1-617-324-1984 email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ llrp-toolkit-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/llrp-toolkit-devel
