Good Evening,
Please excuse my lack of knowledge, I am relatively new to the software but have been googling, reading the boards and trying to paw through source code. Now I wondered if anyone on here could help me.
I am looking to be able to have a URL that when loaded can send parameters through the web socket.
I don't know if this is possible but I am using VisualBasic for a project and need to activate a function/scene within it. The easiest way for me would be to load a URL. Again, I used to be OK with code but this was 10 years ago and I'm trying to re-learn alongside work and life.
To give a better idea what I'm trying for, I have tried:
http://127.0.0.1:9999/?setFunctionStatu ... sfStatus=1
http://127.0.0.1:9999/?setFunctionStatus[0]1
http://127.0.0.1:9999/?QLC+API|setFunctionStatus|[0]|1
I have two functions setup in my test environment "0" & "1"
and I am looking to change the status to "1" run
All return 404 error
Thank You all so much for your time.
Using Parameters in URL via Websocket
- mcallegari
- Posts: 4710
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 9:09 am
- Location: Italy
- Real Name: Massimo Callegari
- Contact:
At the moment the only way is to open a websocket and communicate through it.
Example page:
https://github.com/mcallegari/qlcplus/b ... b_API.html
Parametric URLs are not supported.
Example page:
https://github.com/mcallegari/qlcplus/b ... b_API.html
Parametric URLs are not supported.
-
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2021 9:31 am
- Location: Australia
- Real Name:
- Contact:
Will this be something we look at doing in the future?mcallegari wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:25 pm At the moment the only way is to open a websocket and communicate through it.
Example page:
https://github.com/mcallegari/qlcplus/b ... b_API.html
Parametric URLs are not supported.
- mcallegari
- Posts: 4710
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 9:09 am
- Location: Italy
- Real Name: Massimo Callegari
- Contact:
Not myself.
There's already one working method. I don't see a reason to put efforts to support another method that doesn't even support bi-directional communication (websockets do)
There's already one working method. I don't see a reason to put efforts to support another method that doesn't even support bi-directional communication (websockets do)