[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-calendar] About Resources in the definitions of Terms
I started this thread right after some WS-Calendar work, and sent it to WS-Calendar instead of EMIX where it belongs. tc "It is the theory that decides what can be observed." - Albert Einstein
From: Ed Cazalet [mailto:ed@cazalet.com] Gale, Thanks I agree that virtual and physical resources may coexist in the VTN/VEN world with the physical resource abstracted at a level below the VEN. I agree that a Party may also take on the role of a VTN/VEN. I am not sure what specific aspects of the framework architecture you wish to match up to. Pure transactive interactions leave all characterizations of resources (both virtual and physical ) behind a control interface. Behind this interface, the VTN/VEN concepts might still be used. And again, in the pure transactive interactions outside this interface a Party takes on the role of buyer or seller but not VTN/VEN and there is no need for resource or control concepts. In fact one can argue, as I do , that the concept of a resource and control may inhibit commercial transactive interactions. However, I would let the market decide what interaction patterns make sense and not impose either on any interactions. I think we have taken this coexisting approach of the VTN/VEN and Transactive approaches in EI and the information models in EMIX are supportive of both while making any necessary distinctions to avoid confusion and complexity. Regards, Ed Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D. 101 First Street, Suite 552 Los Altos, CA 94022 650-949-5274 cell: 408-621-2772 From: Horst, Gale [mailto:ghorst@epri.com] Ed and all, A few thoughts on this topic. I have had limited time to remain as involved in this as I would have liked. But I have some concerns about potentially diluting what started out as a clean architecture. A discussion such as this could indicate that we may possibly have drifted from some of the original concepts. I would argue that a Resource is now virtual in the new grid world we are creating. If we must think of a resource as always being a physical device, then we would have to make it clear that a Resource is controlled by a VEN. The physical resource would then be abstracted at a level below the VEN and should not be visible nor specifically addressable above the VEN. We difinitely need to come to grips with terms and definitions and these terms must also match up with the rest of the framework architecture. It would seem that an argument could also be made that what some want to call a Party could in fact be a VTN. If so, call it a VTN. If we need a definition of “Party” it would seem that a party would (could/should) be described in terms of being a VTN or a VEN. My 2-cents again, Gale Gale R. Horst Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) From: Ed Cazalet [mailto:ed@cazalet.com] A Party is an entity receiving services and making decision. A Node is a grid location, except where we use the term VTN or VEN as virtual nodes. A Resource is a device, a set of devices or a curtailment acting as a virtual resource. VENs may be viewed as Resources but the general concept of a Node is not a Resource. Resources may be located at a Node. I think It would be huge error to confuse a Resource as a Party or Node. Resources should stay as Resources. Table 5-1 is fine for Resources. Just leave it that way. It is a reasonable way to characterize resources in additions to the resource offer and resource requirements . Note that Table 5.3 ,Market Requirements, in my view is mislabeled. It should be Resource Requirements. These requirements are characteristics of a Resource that Parties may which to consider in VEN/VTN interactions to offer and dispatch resources. For interactions where the commodity is identified but not the resources, we can use concepts of availability and notification of Parties, but these should not be conflated with the limits on Resources. 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 What if all occurrences of Resource in the terms were replaced by “Party” or “Node” tc “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]