Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

common.xml: Prefer COMMAND_INT when command includes altitude field #1983

Merged

Conversation

nexton-winjeel
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed in #1981, without a reference MAV_FRAME (as is sent in COMMAND_INT) it is possible for receiving systems to mis-interpret altitude values sent in MAV_CMDs. This PR updates the descriptions for COMMAND_INT and COMMAND_LONG to indicate that COMMAND_INT is preferred when the command includes an altitude field.

@nexton-winjeel nexton-winjeel force-pushed the upstream/clarify_command_frame branch from e5e4af9 to ad6ab79 Compare May 3, 2023 03:56
@nexton-winjeel
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hamishwillee: Updated with your improvements.

Copy link
Collaborator

@hamishwillee hamishwillee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI @auturgy @julianoes

I am merging this as a "no brainer". Essentially it adds the fact that unless the frame of positional information is explicitly specified in a particular MAV_CMD fields, using COMMAND_LONG means that the frame is ambiguous.

@hamishwillee hamishwillee merged commit fdef5cc into mavlink:master May 3, 2023
10 checks passed
@hamishwillee
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants