Link_Message and group owned Prims

OK I have a Group owned/deeded prim that I want to give a note card when a command is issued. Grouped owned items do not give inventory items. I am playing with Link_Messahes, but because they have to be "linked" and I can not link to prims that have miss-matched owners... any thoughts, what am I missing?

default
{
    state_entry()
    {
        llSay(0, "Entry state set.");
    }

    touch_start(integer total_number)
    {
        llSay(0,"Primary prim has been touched.");

        // Send a linked message with the number 5, "some string",
        // and the key of the avatar that touched the prim.
        llMessageLinked(LINK_SET, 0, "card", llDetectedKey(0));
    }
}

default
{
    state_entry()
    {
        llSay(0, "Entry state set.");
    }

    link_message(integer senders_num, integer some_integer, string a_string, key avatar_key_id)
    {
    if(a_string == "card")
        {
           llGiveInventory(avatar_key_id, "Note Card"); 
        }
}
}

The above works, but I need the sender prim to be group deeded and the receiver prim to be owned by anyone, but the group... What can I do?

Thanks,

Ohhhh groups "permissions pie" again. Am I alone in thinking that the *reason* group perms are such a problem is that the database structure of SL is not many-to-many, but one-to-many for agent-to-group --- and hence all the issues we have had with groups...? If so, then that is a fundamental application design error that, no matter how much short-term headache it will undoubtedly cause, the gains in the long-run will return in spades if LL choose to repair it.

Erm... as a result of my rant, Sydney, you can tell I don't have a neat solution. You could use the server-script/client-script idea that was suggested, I believe, in another thread...

/esc

Hi Escort, Thanks for the reply.

This is my first run-in with "group_owned" prims. I think I will go bac to my primary prim and figure out a way around the need to have it owned by the group... Grrrr

Thanks,

Sydney

From last week's town hall:
Cory Linden: "Dallas Williamson: Why is the group limit so low?"
Cory Linden: It's an artifact of one of our internal messages. There are also scaling issues related to how we currently handle group permissions, so changing
this is sadly not easy.

Interesting. In which case, the longer it's left, the worse this particular problem will get...

...I see many groups problems manifesting (e.g. perms, listings, transfers), and whilst the changes required of the SL database(s) will undoubtedly impact the persisted data for every single agent in SL, and so will be hard to fix, it's a problem that will have increasingly deleterious effects on the application code the longer it is left unsolved.

My 2c on that!

/esc