@timyhac - This is what I was talking about in chat. When testing in real-world I found myself with a lot of lines that looked like:

workOrderRequest.Value = workOrderDTO.Request;
workOrderRequest.Write();

workOrderQuantity.Value = workOrderDTO.Quantity;
workOrderQuantity.Write();

workOrderDate.Value = workOrderDTO.Date;
workOrderDate.Write();

It felt really redundant for something that is a pretty common need. The PLC side was written by an external supplier, so remapping into a UDT for a single write wasn't really an option.

The overloads should be a non-breaking API change (not that it matters at this point). You can stick with the old functionality above if you need to queue a bunch of writes, or utilize the overload to pass values as part of the Write:

workOrderRequest.Write(workOrderDTO.Request);
workOrderQuantity.Write(workOrderDTO.Quantity);
workOrderDate.Write(workOrderDTO.Date);

Thoughts? I don't really see a downside other than having more API calls and maybe being a little more confusing to people using the library since there's options?