State rules and wire transmission

, , ,
1

Imported from previous forum

2

[ original email was from Yemi Oluwi - yemi.oluwi@db.com ]
In the FIXatdl the StateRule statement controls the visible/enabled property of a control. When a control is not visible or not enabled another StateRule is required if this parameter is NOT to be sent down the wire.

Would it not make more sense to define that values for hidden and disabled controls should not be sent down the wire? If they have been hidden or the user prevented from selecting a value then the value it should be (if any) must be able to be deduced from the specification and therefore transmission is unnecessary?

3

In the FIXatdl the StateRule statement controls the visible/enabled
property of a control. When a control is not visible or not enabled
another StateRule is required if this parameter is NOT to be sent
down the wire.

Would it not make more sense to define that values for hidden and
disabled controls should not be sent down the wire? If they have been
hidden or the user prevented from selecting a value then the value it
should be (if any) must be able to be deduced from the specification and
therefore transmission is unnecessary?

Note that the only way to make a control “read-only” (where the user cannot see the value) at present is to set it enabled=“false” (or visible=“false”), however, that does not mean that one does not want the value to go over the wire. I questioned the “visible” setting as being something that can control ok-for-the-wire, however, it was later clarified that one must use value=“{NULL}” to declare the control as not having a value to go over the wire.

4

[ original email was from Yemi Oluwi - yemi.oluwi@db.com ]
Thanks Scott. What are the reasons for allowing the value of a hidden control to be sent down the wire?

In the FIXatdl the StateRule statement controls the visible/enabled
property of a control. When a control is not visible or not enabled
another StateRule is required if this parameter is NOT to be sent down
the wire.

Would it not make more sense to define that values for hidden and
disabled controls should not be sent down the wire? If they have been
hidden or the user prevented from selecting a value then the value it
should be (if any) must be able to be deduced from the specification
and therefore transmission is unnecessary?

Note that the only way to make a control “read-only” (where the user
cannot see the value) at present is to set it enabled=“false” (or
visible=“false”), however, that does not mean that one does not want the
value to go over the wire. I questioned the “visible” setting as being
something that can control ok-for-the-wire, however, it was later
clarified that one must use value=“{NULL}” to declare the control as not
having a value to go over the wire.