Re: [energyinterop] Updated transactive payloads

[Girish Ghatikar <gghatikar@lbl.gov>]

Hi Bill,
Looks like a good progress. For quote, I recommend publisher and subscriber (publisherParty and subscriberParty) -- this is a common paradigm for publish/subscribe architecture and must be followed if the term  publisher is used. This paradigm also applies to the DR events.

Thanks,
-Rish

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:26 PM, William Cox <wtcox@coxsoftwarearchitects.com> wrote:

All --

Here are cleaned up versions of the transactive payloads after several long discussions. This is adjusted from the style I showed October 12 to one where the tops of groups line up, making it easy to see what's not in a pattern.

BTW my EAP is based on wd29 schemas. Available (I'll upload it) on request.

Issues remaining (see also the attached notes file and the diagrams for details)

(1) Naming of parties.  For example, in Request:

Tender:    Tenderer, Tenderee
Transaction:    Party, CounterParty
Quote:    publisher, quoted

I've gone to party/CounterParty in Transaction, tendererParty/TendereeParty in Tender, and publisherParty/quotedParty in Quote.

Gerry may be right on the interactions - if I receive a Create* I know that I'm the counterparty. If I send a request* I could be either (are the queries symmetric? need for the data queries).  So maybe it's not an issue.

(2) If we keep using Tender-specific party names, it should probably be "TenderER" and "TenderEE" (to emphasize the differences). That's a global (EiClasses and EiPayloads) change.

BTW investorwords.com says that the US term is Bidder.  I don't think that has the same meaning. So I'm happy with "tenderer/tenderee" but I'm getting happier with party/counterparty.

RequestOR is listed with RequestER  in my dictionaries.

(3) How to show these figures - the parallel diagrams have proven extremely valuable. Do we want/need a repeat or a subset for the respective sections?

(4) Ed Cazalet and I have come to the conclusion that a single emixBase is what's needed in a tender, with 1..* eiTenders.  But Quote and Transaction have 1..* and are not quite aligned.

Suggestions welcome on this point.

(5) I've added attributes to EiQuoteType, EiTenderType, and EiTransactionType including the ...ID.  Should the transacting parties be added?

Thanks!

bill
--

William Cox
Email: wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
+1 908 277 3460 fax

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: energyinterop-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: energyinterop-help@lists.oasis-open.org

-- 
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].