Perspective View Custom property Bind using "its name"

Ignition
,
1

In a Perspective view, I would like to know if there is a way to create a custom tag with a binding to a tag in indirect mode defined as follows:

{basePath}/{customPropertyName}

where "customPropertyName" is the name of the "custom property" for which the binding is being created.

For example:
view > custom > MyOpcTag

{basePath}/{customPropertyName} > [device]bla/bla/bla/MyOpcTag

This would greatly speed up the assignment of tags-UDT when there are too many data points in the UDT and you do not want to map all of them using the binding direct to UDT path.

2

No automatic way to do anything like that.

2 Likes
3

Okay, I will bind them one by one as usual.

It would be nice to have a way to filter/select the tags of a UDT to activate only the necessary bindings... I'm a lazy man

1 Like
4

It sounds like you're asking how make an indirect tag path to each of your UDT members.

I only have one main parameter on any of my templates/template views - the UDT instance path. The, my UDT members are indirectly bound by creating the member tag path from the UDT instance path.

Using your example, the only parameter to the view would be basePath. Then you would have custom properties within the view that build off the base path. {basePath}/memberName. Then, components within the view would be bound to this custom property.

What I think you're asking for is a way to pull the custom property name into your indirect binding (in place of "memberName" - right? (if so, I don't think that's possible).

5

I interpret this question as, he's using a basepath already which is presumably the UDT instance path, and wants to bind to a number of tags in the UDT instance, but can't be bothered editing each indirect binding with the name of the tag relevant to the prop he's binding it to. I can relate sometimes :sweat_smile: unfortunately you're stuck with the scenic route on this one

4 Likes
6

Yes, you understood correctly. For my convenience in diagnostics and speed of development, I prefer to create the binding to the Tags in the custom properties of the View/Template rather than creating various indirect bindings in the different properties of the controls. Sometimes the UDT could have 100 tags, and it is a waste of resources to bind the entire UDT when the View/Template might only need half of them... For convenience, I use a tool/script to do this so that I can copy and paste only what is needed just once. Thank you.

7

Yes, that is the way you should do it as well - I would go so far as to say it is best practice.

I have never (not once!) used a UDT binding on a view/window. It's always the path to the UDT instance that is passed and used to make other indirect bindings. I believe binding to the UDT itself would hinder performance, but I could be mistaken. Of course, there are also going be be cases where not every member of the UDT is going to be used.

3 Likes