OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

energyinterop message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Re: Notes on semantics and models

I agree that the "semantics" has been used in a semantically ambiguous

Furthermore, I do not think that we should "define" or "redefine" semantics
because semantics is already a defined word. Energy Interoperability
Semantics should be equal to the use cases that define them.

With kind regards,

Michel Kohanim, C.E.O
Universal Devices, Inc.

(p) 818.631.0333
(f) 818.708.0755

-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Wallace [mailto:ewallace@cme.nist.gov] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 8:53 AM
To: William Cox
Cc: Energy Interoperation TC
Subject: Re: [energyinterop] Re: Notes on semantics and models

Bill Cox including the following in some notes from last week's telecon:

>> (e) CEC version disclaims any "semantics" (PDF page 22) but describes
"programs" that have specific meaning. 
>> We need to resolve that issue. IMO, the meaning and expected response to
the messages is the "semantics" -- and 
>> we need a discussion on this soon. (CD01 on lines 795 et seq discusses
"Energy Interoperability Semantics").
> B: Semantics of the word "semantics" --

The text in the CEC document reads:

  The authors refer to OpenADR as a "communications data model" to
  information exchange between two end-points, the utility or ISO and the
facility. It is not
  a protocol that specifies "bit-structures" or "semantics" as some
  protocols do. In some references the term "system," "technology," or
"service" is used to
  refer to the features of OpenADR.

It's not at all clear from this what the authors meant by "semantics".  I
suggest that we ignore the
text, and as Bill has suggested, define what *we* mean by semantics and use
it that way.  I vote for semantics
being merely the meaning of the messages and any of their parts. This would
not include an expected response unless 
that response would consistently characterize the message or element across
its many uses.  Some things will simply
have weak semantics if their interpretation varies widely (say by programs
and by participant and by situtation/time-


Evan K. Wallace
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]