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
In my work, there's some simple task like Gripping object. Our implementation required to set 2 coil of PLC aka. a gripping coil and a releasing coil. Let me show you the example:
I also like this idea. However, I can see one issue with it. Currently, it's possible to have a node and a subtree with the same name, and if the syntax is the same, it will not be possible to distinguish them. One solution I can think of is adding some prefix to the name of the tree, but after all, it might not be a big issue.
In my work, there's some simple task like Gripping object. Our implementation required to set 2 coil of PLC aka. a gripping coil and a releasing coil. Let me show you the example:
If this tree is already loaded, I think we should be able to use the compact representation like
<Grip close="True"/> <!-- To close the gripper -->
But with the current implementation, it is limited to
<SubTree ID='Grip' close="True"/>
I personally think that it'll be much more elegant if the SubTree could be used in compact form
AFAIK the compact representation does only support action Compact vs Explicit.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: