energyinterop — archive

[Girish Ghatikar <gghatikar@lbl.gov>]

Hi Bill, I think Ed has a good elaboration (in a separate thread to Toby) why the sentence in the document is confusing, "This suggests that Market Context is an attribute of a Signal, and not 50 of an Event." I do see the MC as part of the business arrangement between two parties. However, it should not be muddled with the message information -- either events/signals. For me, the events/signals originate from this arrangement. I am not against the inclusion of the URIs -- it's the most we should be doing rather than communicating the entire MC information all the time. Thanks, -Rish On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 7:38 PM, William Cox < wtcox@coxsoftwarearchitects.com > wrote: Rish - Thanks for the response. There's definitely further discussion needed once we get agreement on Theory 1. Anyone on theories 2 and 3? One problem with the off-line contract is that there's no actionable information relating the actions, the signals/events received, and so forth. It's like a tag in the header - as you may have Enrolled in more than one program/tariff/etc which is represented as a MarketContext - so disambiguation is needed. And we can't assume only a single Market Context. It's a bit like sending a PDF of the tariff -- how does your device read it? I'd argue that multiple signal streams COULD be in the same market context (looking at Ed's diagram), but I don't think that the EV price/signal tariff is going to be the same as the others. Referencing could be as simple as the URI being the key and hence the UID, as in other discussion. Thanks! bill -- William Cox Email: wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com +1 862 485 3696 mobile +1 908 277 3460 fax On 10/2/11 10:12 PM, Girish Ghatikar wrote: I think that the theory 1 seem to be the most logical from the context of current market programs. Still requires some discussion. In most cases, even a URI may not be needed as part of the events/signals for a DR program/tariff as they're part of contractual agreement. For example, if I have signed to participate in a program and carefully devised my building control strategies to respond to a particular DR program/tariff, why should I be reminded of it all the time? I also see the relative connections of market context to the building/resource as opposed to a specific event/signal -- the resource participates in the program not the event/signal. I am still not clear on the use case of multiple events being part of the same market context -- if there is one. Thanks, -Rish On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 6:03 PM, William Cox < wtcox@coxsoftwarearchitects.com > wrote: I've looked at this linked document carefully. I think that theory one makes the most sense. What do you think? Answering this question makes a large number of our working Jira items a lot simpler and the output less muddy - see for instance OpenADR Alliance issue http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/ENERGYINTEROP-508 and my comment. Thanks! bill -- William Cox Email: wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com +1 862 485 3696 mobile +1 908 277 3460 fax On 10/2/11 12:59 PM, Toby Considine wrote: Document Name : EventWithMultipleSignals 20110902.zip Description As requested: EiEvent artifact containing multiple (4) Event Signals, one for each kind of price, and one for program levels. Also printed to PDF to provide line numbers for comments Also my comments on some overl issues, and some drill-down on Markt Context issues. Download Latest Revision Public Download Link Submitter : Toby Considine Group : OASIS Energy Interoperation TC Folder : Contributions Date submitted : 2011-10-02 09:59:32 -- Rish Ghatikar Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road, MS: 90-3111, Berkeley, CA 94720 GGhatikar@lbl.gov +1 510.486.6768 +1 510.486.4089 [fax] This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain confidential information and should not be copied without permission. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email from computer[s]. -- Rish Ghatikar Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road, MS: 90-3111, Berkeley, CA 94720 GGhatikar@lbl.gov +1 510.486.6768 +1 510.486.4089 [fax] This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain confidential information and should not be copied without permission. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email from computer[s].