# ParameterType Control mapping

**URL:** <https://forum.fixtrading.org/t/parametertype-control-mapping/1637>\
**Category:** General Q&A\
**Tags:** algorithmic-trading, xid\_169251, imported\
**Created:** [October 10, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://forum.fixtrading.org/t/parametertype-control-mapping/1637 "2010-10-10T14:51:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![neilcook99\_x](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@neilcook99\_x](https://forum.fixtrading.org/u/neilcook99_x)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://forum.fixtrading.org/t/parametertype-control-mapping/1637/1 "2010-10-10T14:51:27Z")

</div>

Imported from previous forum

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![neilcook99\_x](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@neilcook99\_x](https://forum.fixtrading.org/u/neilcook99_x)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://forum.fixtrading.org/t/parametertype-control-mapping/1637/2 "2010-10-10T14:51:27Z")

</div>

One thing missing from the specification is a matrix to show which ParameterTypes are valid for which Controls.

Some are very obvious, for example LocalMktDate\_t, UTCDateOnly\_t, UTCTimestamp\_t and UTCTimeOnly\_t only really make sense to be bound to a Clock\_t control.

All numerical types such as Amt\_t, Float\_t, Int\_t, Percentage\_t etc. make sense to be bound to SingleSpinner\_t, DoubleSpinner\_t and TextField\_t.

String types such as Char\_t, String\_t makes sense to be bound to TextField\_t, but string types do not make sense to be bound to numerical controls such as SingleSpinner\_t and DounbleSpinner\_t.

This is by no means an exhaustive list but just a few examples of what does and doesn’t make sense. A matrix representing what is and isn’t valid would certainly make it easier when building an atdl implementation.

What rules have others applied in this area or have you left it open hoping that when atdl files are created by brokers they are done in a sensible way ?

Thx. Neil.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jasonwheeler\_x](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jasonwheeler\_x](https://forum.fixtrading.org/u/jasonwheeler_x)\
**Post date:** [October 11, 2010, 7:24pm UTC](https://forum.fixtrading.org/t/parametertype-control-mapping/1637/3 "2010-10-11T19:24:46Z")

</div>

> One thing missing from the specification is a matrix to show which ParameterTypes are valid for which Controls.
> 
> Some are very obvious, for example LocalMktDate\_t, UTCDateOnly\_t, UTCTimestamp\_t and UTCTimeOnly\_t only really make sense to be bound to a Clock\_t control.
> 
> All numerical types such as Amt\_t, Float\_t, Int\_t, Percentage\_t etc. make sense to be bound to SingleSpinner\_t, DoubleSpinner\_t and TextField\_t.
> 
> String types such as Char\_t, String\_t makes sense to be bound to TextField\_t, but string types do not make sense to be bound to numerical controls such as SingleSpinner\_t and DounbleSpinner\_t.
> 
> This is by no means an exhaustive list but just a few examples of what does and doesn’t make sense. A matrix representing what is and isn’t valid would certainly make it easier when building an atdl implementation.
> 
> What rules have others applied in this area or have you left it open hoping that when atdl files are created by brokers they are done in a sensible way ?
> 
> Thx. Neil.

Seems like this would be a decent idea provided there aren’t major differences among platform types and that it doesn’t necessarily prohibit something that may be unusual but is still allowable (which can lead to inventive solutions).