#is it acceptable to have the same

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

hidden crater
#

@crystal bronze please don't forget about this, whenever you have the time. Thanks!

olive knoll
#

you cannot have duplicate sentences

#

HA can't know which one to pick

#

make sure your fixtures do not have generic names and you can avoid that

hidden crater
#

that's not the idea. in romanian, the translation for "turn off [the light]" and the translation for "close [the door]" can be the same: "inchide [lumina]" / "inchide [usa]"

#

the specificity of the entity name is not relevant in this context. the same wording for 2 intents (turn off/close) is

olive knoll
#

Ah

#

Yeah we don’t have a solution for that yet

#

Matching only names from a domain

crystal bronze
#

I have a feature in the intent matcher to try out here. You can say an intent should only match entities from a specific domain.
This still needs to be tested, but I think we won't need device class in this case.

#

@hidden crater Do you have a PR I can test against?

olive knoll
#

@crystal bronze note that you also need to be able to specify the opposite for the other sentence. HassTurnOn should not target any cover domain entities

crystal bronze
#

Right. I have requires_context for the HassOpenCover side and excludes_context for the HassTurnOn side 👍

hidden crater
#

Uhm... wait, the commit I referenced actually reveals a related, but more specific issue: common wordings between different device_class contexts of the same intent. I'll get back with a relevant link for the mismatched intent.

#

would it be better if I add some issues with proper description on the intents repo @crystal bronze @olive knoll ? I feel as though it's easier to get sidetracked with a discussion on Discord 🙂

hidden crater