Nuances in Event Language

[SeattleDavid]

First let me apologize since probably somewhere int he vastness of thousands of postings these questions probably have been answered, although in skimming through them I haven't identified which needle in the haystack it might be. So I will ask either for a pointer or if somebody could take a moment and see if my understanding is correct. (I did ask Customer Service but they explained (in somewhat different language) that a lack of a manual doesn't mean I can use them as a manual and that they didn't have time to read this.)

Again, I'm perfectly happy to answer these by reading if I can just find where they are documented...

Is my understanding about these event triggers precisely correct?


The device changes and becomes…
This event will only be triggered once, when the value of the device changes, and ONLY if the new value is the specified value. If the previous value was 50 and it is set to 50 then the event will not trigger.


Had its value set to…
This event will be triggered anytime the value is set to the specified value, even if the device previously had this same value. Do if it was 50 and gets set to 50 then it will be triggered again. The value does not need to actually change to be triggered to it can trigger at 50 and again at 50 and again at 50....


Just had its value set or changed…
This event is triggered every time the device's value is set. The "or changed" wording is entirely superfluous and unnecessary, since it cannot change without being set. That is, it will trigger every time the device is set, even if it is set to the same as the previous value.


Has a value that just changed…
This will only trigger of the old value is different from the new value. If it is set to the same value, it will not trigger the event.

[Guest]

Not exactly. The first two triggers will specify a specific value: "Device changes and becomes 50" or "Has is value set to 50" (the difference is like you indicated, the Set will fire even if the device is already 50, the change will not). The other two are for a change (or set) to any value.

[Guest]

I do realize we both are saying the same thing. I just wanted to make clearer that the first two are for a specific, specified value, and the second two are for any, and unspecified value.

[SeattleDavid]

I'm still a little confused.

You start by saying "Not exactly" but then when I read what you write it seems to be exactly what I wrote. So what part is "Not exactly"?

Your remaining sentence seems to exactly confirm that what I wrote was correct. So what part of what I wrote is "Not exactly"?

Thanks.

[SeattleDavid]

Oh, OK. So what I have written is exactly correct?

I am sorry if my description rose concern over specific values or any value. I tried to be clear, but may have failed.

So the red "or changed" wording is entirely superfluous and unnecessary in the third example, and it is just poorly worded?

[randy]

Your first post was exactly correct. The set or changed wording is a little superfluous but is absolutely correct and not poorly worded. When a device is changed it is usually set, but within scripting a device can be changed without being “set”.

This will set the value of a device
hs.SetDeviceValueByRef(1234, 1, True)

This can change a value without it being "Set"
hs.SetDeviceValueByRef(1234, 1, False)

I will add another post to the device triggers thread in this forum clarifying the nuances.

[Guest]

My apologies for not being "exact" on my initial reply. I was responding to the stuff in red. I felt that red statement isn't quite as superfluous as stated, plus the vagueness of the specific value vs any value. But rprade described it much better than I did.

[SeattleDavid]

The red stuff is superfluous to somebody that doesn't do scripting, but because you can trigger on changed without being set in scripting I can see where the developers came up with this language. But, within the Event configuration world the language is superfluous.

Thanks for taking the time to read and respond and to clarify. It is good to understand how a system works.

[randy]

Not to be argumentative, but "set or changed" is not really superfluous. It is possibly a little redundant for those who know the workings of HomeSeer, but a person building an Event who has no scripting knowledge would still want to trigger on whether a device is "changed" or if it is "set or changed", these are two distinct options and do not assume the user has knowledge that a device is usually "set" when changed. Just out of curiosity, how would you name the two choices?

[SeattleDavid]

You are right, accurate, true, precise, faultless, flawless, errorless, error-free, perfect, on the right track, along the right lines.

Definition of superfluous:unnecessary, especially through being more than enough.

I will maintain that it is superfluous, and possibly even confusing, but its not a big deal.

HomeSeer is frustrating for somebody like me because sometimes it is sloppily worded and full of errors, and other times it is redundantly duplicative. This sometimes is too much and often too little information combined with wordings aimed at the wrong audience makes it a system where I never know what is important and what was just not given much thought at all.

Consider this condition:

A "Range" usually allows more than one single entry...that is...a "range".


And, what the heck is the difference between this and this:


I posted this exact question in another thread, and perhaps somebody will answer. But to me, this is an example of either sloppy design or something so lost in the nuances that a normal person can't readily discern the nuances from the wording given.

I struggle a lot with this on HomeSeer in particular. It's just very hard to know when wording was done meaningfully or if it was done without much thought at all. This isn't a problem for anybody that has been initiated through the learning curve, but when compared with modern systems it is constantly inconsistent in the use of terminology and audience.

[logman]

I struggle a lot with this on HomeSeer in particular. It's just very hard to know when wording was done meaningfully or if it was done without much thought at all. This isn't a problem for anybody that has been initiated through the learning curve, but when compared with modern systems it is constantly inconsistent in the use of terminology and audience.

I feel your pain. New Homeseer users (and even veterans) could definitely benefit from a keyword hover-over/balloon help file. And it wouldn't be very hard to do. Randy has already done all the work and heavy lifting with his Wiki's here on the forum. All HS would need to do is give a brief summary of a post along with a direct link to the post for more detailed information.

Using your example post above, a simple "?" to the right of each field could give a brief summary in a balloon pop-up when the "?" is hovered over. Or click the "?" to go directly to one of Randy's posts for a detailed explanation.

This could be done in days, not weeks or months. The time consuming part has already been done for them... free of charge. Any worries about a negative impact on page-load time could be addressed in the settings/setup page with a simple toggle to enable/disable the help file.

--Barry

[drparker151]

I feel your pain. New Homeseer users (and even veterans) could definitely benefit from a keyword hover-over/balloon help file. And it wouldn't be very hard to do. Randy has already done all the work and heavy lifting with his Wiki's here on the forum. All HS would need to do is give a brief summary of a post along with a direct link to the post for more detailed information.

Using your example post above, a simple "?" to the right of each field could give a brief summary in a balloon pop-up when the "?" is hovered over. Or click the "?" to go directly to one of Randy's posts for a detailed explanation.

This could be done in days, not weeks or months. The time consuming part has already been done for them... free of charge.

--Barry

I'm a realativly new user 3 months into using HS3, while I agree there is a lot to grasp and learn. It's not that simple to document. In the example above for an Event of "the device has been/for at least" The choices for value and the text between device name and value change based on the device and what options it has.

So the first screen grab below does use the phrase "in range" not because you are entering a range, but because the device has a range defined and you are picking a value in that defined range vs. entering a custom value.

the 2nd screen grab is the same trigger but a device that does not have a range defined but has discrete values defined.

I find that I learn a lot more and learn it quicker when I just try different things and see how they work. Even after reading some the examples or suggestion of how to do things here in the forum. I'll go play with it until I understand how it works even if it's something I don't plan to implement. It increases my knowledge and understanding of the system and helps me when trying to do things I want to implement.