You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
example: a color light device that supports color temperature requires ColorTempPhysicalMaxMireds to be set as an attribute and will fail conformance fatally if not supplied. However there is a specified default value for this attribute.
would it not make more sense for the default value to be imputed if no express value is provided?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Please add details and the exception and composition information. Because we exactly use the defaults and that should not give any conformance errors (if the default is valid for a certain feature combination).
strangely I am not able to replicate the use case on either the previous installed base or a fresh one.
the scenario I was getting yesterday was conformance failures for not setting all the MS *MIRED attributes. ditto the mandatory attribute (for which there is a default). unless I removed colorTemperature from the features.
Today the device is instantiating correctly whatever the scenario.
The only difference is that today I am trying to build the test case as a standalone. When I have more time I will try again with the device as part of a bridge; but I don't see why that should have any impact at all.
example: a color light device that supports color temperature requires ColorTempPhysicalMaxMireds to be set as an attribute and will fail conformance fatally if not supplied. However there is a specified default value for this attribute.
would it not make more sense for the default value to be imputed if no express value is provided?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: