General Category > Ideas/Feature requests
Websocket sensors?
bear9rpp:
As far as I know, z-wave and zigbee are the only two forms of communication medium that Almond understands.
Would it be possible to create support for a third type of sensors that communicates using Websocket? From quick inspection, the current Websocket API data direction is only one way, being reporting. Creating an incoming API allows for all the tinkerers out there to interface with Almond with their own devices (i.e. PCs / embedded systems / microcontrollers) will definitely help the produce gain popularity, of course i understand that will take away interest/sales from Securifi-branded sensors. Then again, the concept of licensing out more elaborate features can be considered while leaving simple status/trigger information to be free.
I am planning to experiment with the Websocket to interface with my local linux based webcam surveillance system, to have the linux box listen for activities on the motion sensor via WebSocket and trigger recording. This use case fits well with current API, but I can see usefulness for complete two-way communication that Almond can react to.
Just a thought.
bear9rpp:
Sorry, just realized two-way communication is actually possible via the WebSocket API now that I've spent some time reading posts in the software development section.
But the concept of adding a WebSocket-based virtual sensor/device still holds. It will allow for incorporation of DIY sensors to be included in the rules
rpr69:
I too would have liked that, but since I highly doubt that is in any near future plans from Securifi I am going the opposite route. I setup Home Assistant and built a bridge app to get A+ data into HA, plus all of the other stuff that A+ doesn't do, like unsupported/homebrew sensors. So far so good.
SecureComp:
--- Quote from: rpr69 on May 20, 2016, 12:34:47 pm ---I too would have liked that, but since I highly doubt that is in any near future plans from Securifi I am going the opposite route. I setup Home Assistant and built a bridge app to get A+ data into HA, plus all of the other stuff that A+ doesn't do, like unsupported/homebrew sensors. So far so good.
--- End quote ---
Actually all the stuff is there to create a virtual device if you want. The issue is creating one that satisfies everybody asking for one.
Do you think folks would generally be happy with a simple virtual Binary Device?
You know what follows on this, messaging. Sending an email as folks have asked or an SMS message. Well, I wouldn't bother loading that onto the A+ but it could certainly generate a status message that could be checked from any other device whether it be a RaspPI or VM machine running on a PC which then in turn could generate the email or SMS easily. All at the whopping cost of $20 at most.
bear9rpp:
@SecureComp
Yes, a binary device is fine. Are you saying current websocket APIs already allows for creation of such a device? Do tell please...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version