Comfort Automation/ Security System Forums Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register
Comfort Automation/ Security System Forums > Support > Comments, Suggestions & Feedback > Protocol Manual

Protocol Manual
 Moderated by: admin
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Monday Apr 2nd, 2012 07:46 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
1st Post
juwi_uk
Member


Joined: Friday May 25th, 2007
Location: Newbury, United Kingdom
Posts: 1255
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

If I send RM01 say to Comfort, I would expect to get back the settings for Reminder 1 as per the protocol manual?

All I get back is "OK".

What am I doing wrong?

Julian

ULT 6.015
UCM 6.012

Attachment: RMs.png (Downloaded 40 times)

Last edited on Monday Apr 2nd, 2012 07:48 pm by juwi_uk


 Posted: Monday Apr 2nd, 2012 09:21 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
2nd Post
juwi_uk
Member


Joined: Friday May 25th, 2007
Location: Newbury, United Kingdom
Posts: 1255
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

Ah,

Ingo just spotted something I missed in the protocol manual;


The UCM will return the current parameters of the Reminder
16/4/09 Implemented in UCM5.182 Not implemented in Comfort

Given this was presumably last updated in 2009 can I deduce that this feature never made it into firmware.

I thought whilst I was adding Time Programs into ComfortClient I'd also do the same for Reminder Messages too.

Oops, "I'm all dressed for the Ball but have nobody to dance with"!

Any chance this can be added to a firmware near us soon or should I remove the feature from my code?

Julian

Attachment: Reminders.png (Downloaded 39 times)

Last edited on Monday Apr 2nd, 2012 09:31 pm by juwi_uk


 Posted: Tuesday Apr 3rd, 2012 01:54 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
3rd Post
ident
Administrator


Joined: Wednesday Aug 9th, 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3493
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

I think you should remove this feature for the time being.
WE have not decided when to add the Reminders query in Comfort as it is not a very mucj used feature


 Posted: Wednesday Apr 4th, 2012 08:58 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
4th Post
juwi_uk
Member


Joined: Friday May 25th, 2007
Location: Newbury, United Kingdom
Posts: 1255
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

That's a shame.

Maybe it's time to revise the protocol manual an rip out anything that isn't going to actually happen as my interpretation of it being there is that it is going to be developed. If it's not then why have it there as it is going to cause confusion.

Regards

Julian


 Posted: Thursday Apr 5th, 2012 08:34 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
5th Post
ident
Administrator


Joined: Wednesday Aug 9th, 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3493
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

It may happen but not immediately so it cannot be removed
It is a reminder for things that have yet to be implemented


 Posted: Thursday Apr 5th, 2012 08:39 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
6th Post
juwi_uk
Member


Joined: Friday May 25th, 2007
Location: Newbury, United Kingdom
Posts: 1255
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

Absolutely I understand that but if the protocol manual is the guide for developers interfacing to Comfort then as an "external facing document" it needs to be representative of what's available now or imminently expected in the next firmware.

This particular case of last being updated in 2009 is not "very imminent" and therefore entries like this should be kept internal and out of this document IMHO

:0)

Regrads

Julian


 Posted: Thursday Apr 5th, 2012 08:51 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
7th Post
ident
Administrator


Joined: Wednesday Aug 9th, 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3493
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

The comments that commands  have not been implemented should be sufficient information to developers.
It serves as a reminder to our developers about future implementation which would otherwise be lost
In practical terms it is too much to comb through the documents before each release as resources are limited.





 Posted: Thursday Apr 5th, 2012 11:35 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
8th Post
Ingo
UCM Pi Users


Joined: Sunday Jan 21st, 2007
Location: South Africa
Posts: 562
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

Julian,

You say ComfortClient 'is all dressed up and no one to dance with'??? Just wait for the next release of the Comfort Simulator as I've included the RM command.

This will help possible development and if there is positive feedback from the community then perhaps Cytech might just include the RM command in a 'near' future firmware.

Ingo


 Posted: Thursday Apr 5th, 2012 11:38 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
9th Post
juwi_uk
Member


Joined: Friday May 25th, 2007
Location: Newbury, United Kingdom
Posts: 1255
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

But I don't want to dance with you! :P


 Posted: Thursday Apr 5th, 2012 11:42 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
10th Post
Ingo
UCM Pi Users


Joined: Sunday Jan 21st, 2007
Location: South Africa
Posts: 562
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

Ok, I think it's time I get a nice girl to do my marketing then :)


 Current time is 06:55 pm
Comfort Automation/ Security System Forums > Support > Comments, Suggestions & Feedback > Protocol Manual
 Top

UltraBB 1.172 Copyright © 2007-2014 Data 1 Systems