PID = SUPPORTED_PARAMTERS / PARAMTER_DESCRIPTION question - E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums

prwatE120 · September 30th, 2009

Hi Bernt

We do not include DMX_START_ADDRESS, as we always treat it as "required PID".

Some of our products have multiple personalities, and only one of them might have a DMX footprint of 0, and I felt it was important that the list of SUPPORTED_PIDs was the same regardless of the current personality setting.

The PARAMATER_DESCRIPTION PID is only required if you are declaring support for Manufacturer specific PIDS. The test in section 10.4.2 is a bit weak, as it refers to "some" manufacturer-specific PIDs.

We have more of a problem with the construct of PID, as about the only thing you can properly describe about our particular Man-specific PIDS using the defined fields as per 10.4.2 is a text string. The rest of the structure of this PID cannot adequately describe the format requirements of our implementations.

Although you could argue that they are "non-compliant" products, I would not be that upset to see products that declared the existence of manufacturer specific PIDS in there list of SUPPORTED_PARAMETERS and did not support the PARAMATER_DESCRIPTION PID.

At least this way you know there is something that the manufacturer might allow you to control, and you ask them for more details !

regards

Peter Willis
Howard Eaton Lighting

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Mute Response Question	sondericker	RDM Interpretation Questions	13	January 21st, 2007 10:14 AM

September 30th, 2009	#3
prwatE120 Task Group Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 181	Hi Bernt We do not include DMX_START_ADDRESS, as we always treat it as "required PID". Some of our products have multiple personalities, and only one of them might have a DMX footprint of 0, and I felt it was important that the list of SUPPORTED_PIDs was the same regardless of the current personality setting. The PARAMATER_DESCRIPTION PID is only required if you are declaring support for Manufacturer specific PIDS. The test in section 10.4.2 is a bit weak, as it refers to "some" manufacturer-specific PIDs. We have more of a problem with the construct of PID, as about the only thing you can properly describe about our particular Man-specific PIDS using the defined fields as per 10.4.2 is a text string. The rest of the structure of this PID cannot adequately describe the format requirements of our implementations. Although you could argue that they are "non-compliant" products, I would not be that upset to see products that declared the existence of manufacturer specific PIDS in there list of SUPPORTED_PARAMETERS and did not support the PARAMATER_DESCRIPTION PID. At least this way you know there is something that the manufacturer might allow you to control, and you ask them for more details ! regards Peter Willis Howard Eaton Lighting