CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp

Bits and byte level questions, ideas and suggestions for the CITP protocol.
tomgr
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 1:50 pm

CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp

Postby tomgr » Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:55 pm

Could you provide some illumination regarding the Element Update message, CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp, please? There looks to be ambiguity regarding the mix of LibraryId, AffectedElements and AffectedLibraries members of the structure.

Is the implied hierarchy of the structure members LibraryId, then the sub libraries of the referenced LibraryId, and then the elements of the flagged sub libraries? Or, are the AffectedElements member and the AffectedLibraries member at the same level of the implied hierarchy? I'm not quite sure how to sort which flagged elements apply to which flagged sublibrary.

Could you provide an example or three to clarify the intent and implementation of this message?

Thanks in advance.
tom

User avatar
lasso
Site Admin
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 7:44 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Contact:

Re: CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp

Postby lasso » Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:14 am

tomgr wrote:Is the implied hierarchy of the structure members LibraryId, then the sub libraries of the referenced LibraryId, and then the elements of the flagged sub libraries? Or, are the AffectedElements member and the AffectedLibraries member at the same level of the implied hierarchy? I'm not quite sure how to sort which flagged elements apply to which flagged sublibrary.


The AffectedElements and AffectedLibraries are both a the same "level" immediately under LibraryId. That is, each library can contain both elements and libraries. I think this duality is what complects it a bit. Does that help?
Lars Wernlund
Technical Manager, Capture Sweden

tomgr
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 1:50 pm

Re: CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp

Postby tomgr » Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:05 pm

Then a LibraryId which contains elements (i.e. media files) but no sublibraries (i.e. subdirectories) would only ever have AffectedElements bits set and never AffectedLibraries bits set?

Not sure of the intent of the AffectedLibraries bit field. Is this intended to provide a hint to the client to dig deeper into the library structure for further changes?

Pardon my mental density, but some explicit intent my be helpful.

Thanks in advance.
tom

tomgr
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 1:50 pm

Re: CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp

Postby tomgr » Mon Aug 13, 2012 3:58 pm

If Lars is not going to respond with some explicit examples, it would be helpful if a person or three writing CITP client code would chime in with an example or three of what they are expecting to receive in this update message.

Thanks in advance.
tom

User avatar
lasso
Site Admin
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 7:44 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Contact:

Re: CITP_MSEX_1.2_ELUp

Postby lasso » Mon Aug 20, 2012 6:30 am

tomgr wrote:Not sure of the intent of the AffectedLibraries bit field. Is this intended to provide a hint to the client to dig deeper into the library structure for further changes?


Well, the element library as such has properties too such as its name, which is perhaps the most likely to change.
Lars Wernlund
Technical Manager, Capture Sweden


Return to “Design - For developers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron