[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emix] RE: Extended Price and Unit Price on the outside of the Envelope
Understand. So why shouldn't extended price and
discount be in the product description referenced on the face of the envelope? Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D. 101 First Street, Suite 552 Los Altos, CA 94022 650-949-5274 cell: 408-621-2772 From: Toby Considine [mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of Toby Considine Remember, the entire product is
on the face of the envelope… "If something is not worth
doing, it`s not worth doing well" - Peter Drucker
From: Ed Cazalet
[mailto:ed@cazalet.com] First in table 3-1 we have
Perhaps it should read
Second. It seems like we
are saying that the product description is intrinsic and is on the face of the
envelope. Only the warrants are extrinsic ( inside the envelope ) Correct? So this means the envelope front
has all of the detailed price, quantity and interval detail in some cases by
reference to a source on the web. Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D. 101 First Street, Suite 552 Los Altos, CA 94022 650-949-5274 cell: 408-621-2772 From: Toby Considine
[mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Toby Considine In the trivial case (single
interval. single block, no ramp, specified time and date) then this all
collapses, the product is trivial, and the distinction between the envelop and
product is meaningless. Only in that circumstance does the unit price make
sense on the envelope, and then it is not needed. The EMIX envelope may be
delivering other things than power. Natural Gas was explicitly mentioned in the
charter, although declared out of scope for v1.0. VoltVar is a different
product than power. Units are only defined w/I the Product space, in this case,
power. That is, Units are not defined for the generic EMIX envelope. This is
critical to maintain extensibility in the manner promised. Our line is
“To define a new product, all you need to do is derive a product
description from the emix.Product,, and then it will ride in an EMIX envelope,
and then EI can deliver it.” (Perhps that sentence needs to make it into
wd14) Product may be a reference to an
external object, a gluon pointing to something in web-space. In that case the
description of the product is nowhere in the envelope. This is a fully allowed
and legal use of EMIX, whether the Product is a defined load shape, a defied
DR, or a defined Generation resource. Again, we don’t want to break that. Again, going to the Grocery
store, it is common for single beers to have a different price than the six
pack, it is common to get a case of canned tomatoes with a case price (based on
the UPC on the box) or crack the box and buy the same dozen at a different
price (based on the slightly different UPC on each can.) If a particular market
wants to declare for conformance that price to always matches, that’s OK.
If a different market wants to charge a $20 participation fee on each trade
handled, that is also OK. Perhaps the only purpose of the
outside of the envelope is to route purchasing approvals. My EIS can make any
decisions under $5. Perhaps the 3rd party energy services provider
charges a 1% transaction fee on all transactions. We cannot design EMIX only for
the precise needs of the CAL ISO of November 2010. We are building to handle today,
but also markets that we do not know. The conformance statements are
good. The ones listed probably belong in profile-by-profile (meaning market by
market) rules. tc "If something is not worth
doing, it`s not worth doing well" - Peter Drucker
From: Ed Cazalet
[mailto:ed@cazalet.com] Following up on our discussion of yesterday about prices on
the EMIX envelope. ( I am not arguing for these changes for WD 14 ) When we buy packaged goods at a store the label on the shelf
typically shows the price of the package, the quantity, i.e. ounces, and the
price per ounce. The label on the package will have more information, (
ingredients, source, inspections, etc.) The EMIX envelope front displays only the package (extended
price). You have to open our envelope to get quantity and unit price.
The unit price is useful in comparing packages of different
sizes but the lowest unit price might not be the best if we don't need the
quantity in a larger, lower unit price package. EMIX has a different EMIX package (envelope) and
EMIX option package (envelope). The EMIX package (envelope) actually describes at least
three different packages. 1. A package containing a quantity of energy delivered
across a sequence of intervals possibly at various rates of delivery at a total
price. 2. A single interval, constant power package of a specific
quantity and a specific unit price or an amount up to the amount offered. 3. Resource capabilities (VEN) that provide an option to
produce energy at costs and within rate constraints dictated by a complex
resource model. However, the VTN that operates the VEN may use prices for
informing its dispatch or conveying dispatch signals. ( hard to convey on the
front of the envelope) We could have different envelopes for the 3 packages above,
just as we now have a different envelope for an EMIX option. Or for now: Add a nilable total energy quantity to the face of the
envelope Add a nilable unit price to the face of the envelope. Conformance can say that a resource capability may have no
extended price, quantity or unit price. Conformance can say that no extended price should apply to
an offer at unit price and that the offer quantity is a maximum quantity.
A transaction that may result would have an extended price and quantity and the
unit price would be interesting. Conformance can say that Package 1 above can have a
quantity, extended price and a unit price, but that only the total package
quantity is actionable ( no partial package price ) Ed Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D. 101 First Street, Suite 552 Los Altos, CA 94022 650-949-5274 cell: 408-621-2772 |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]