[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMIX-476) wd32: misc editorial(primarily section 1)

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-476?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=26052#action_26052 ] 

Toby Considine commented on EMIX-476:
-------------------------------------

Tables across pages:

As the OASIS published version uses a different template
AS *we* on the TC have no control of the production of those final documents
And as the pagination is not identical in the final format template and the working template
And as neither of these affects the HTML version at all...

The short answer is: No (or we could, but its a lot of work that would have zero affect on the product)




> wd32: misc editorial (primarily section 1)
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: EMIX-476
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-476
>             Project: OASIS Energy Market Information Exchange (eMIX) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>         Environment: Anne Hendry
>            Reporter: Anne Hendry 
>            Assignee: William Cox
>            Priority: Minor
>
> General:
> Love the compacting of duplicate information!
> Love the diagram in section 6-4 (Figure 6-1)!
> Is there a way to stop tables from breaking across page boundaries?
>          This makes it very hard to read and looks unfinished.
> Specific:
> Line 27 IEC TC57 name (Power systems management ...)  Doesn't seem like the correct/full name.
> Line 28 Business and market information was borrowed from the financial instruments
>         Common Information Models as described in International Standards Organization
>         (ISO) [ISO20022]
>         What exactly are we 'borrowing' from iso 20022?
>         I don't see anything that appears to be from that model and
>         it seems a bit strange to be using two separate 'common information models'
> Line 36 An overview of [WS-Calendar] semantics is provided in Appendix E.
>         Now Appendix C
> Line 42 Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems
>         Should this instead be in non-normative references?  'Normative' indicates it
>         has been included in its entirety into this spec but this was not here until
>         recently.  Where does EMIX incorporate IEEE 1547?
> Lines 101 - 125 All these NAESB links take you to a login page, which won't do anyone
>                 any good.  Might as well not have the hot links.
> Line 127 NIEM in non-normative references.  Thought we had agreed to remove mention of NIEM.
> Line 130 Add hot link to OpenADR spec
>          http://openadr.lbl.gov/pdf/cec-500-2009-063.pdf
> Line 137 Should this be NAESB PAP03, and how does it relate to line 101?
> Lines 145-146 Change 'PAP 03' to 'NIST PAP03'.  Replace 'Details can be found at' with
>               "NIST Priority Action Plan 03, Common Price Communication Model"
>               http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/PAP03PriceProduct
>               or http://www.nist.gov/smartgrid/priority-actions.cfm
>               Remove 'link retrieved 6/23/2010'.
> General Non-normative reference comment: There is NAESB PAP03, NAESB 03, and PAP03 referenced.
>                                          Seems somewhat redundant.  Can these be merged somehow?
> Line 152 Content of section 1.5 'Namespace' is repetitive and confused/confusing.  Also typos.
> Line 453 Table 3-4 (WS-Calendar defined terms)
>          duplicates many of the same elements (but with different definitions) as in
>          Appendix C Table C-1 (WS-Calendar Foundational Semantics)
>          
>          One or the other should be removed (or at least duplicate entries removed).
> Line 178 (Editorial Conventions)
>          Strike first sentence.
>          It raises more questions than answers and not the right place to raise schema rules.
> Line 184 Strike sentence
>          "Each business process will have its own security needs,
>           including different consequences for failure of security."
>          It just clutters up the concept which is better communicated with sentences before and after.
> Figure 2-1.  Concept is not getting across.  What does the line represent?
>              Could it be horizontal?  Doesn't seem to necessarily represent the information in
>              the text above. Would suggest removing for now because, while it is a wonderfully
>              clean and clear diagram it takes up a lot of room and doesn't yet add to the
>              understanding of the concepts presented.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira