The key issues not address by either Table 7.1 is:
1. Transitive Services often require enrollment is Enabling Agreements such as Tariffs, Trading agreements, exchanges, etc. So enrollment for both Transactive and VTN/VEN services is needed.
2. The Enrolment Service needs to identify what is being enrolled in, such as DR Program, Enabling Agreement etc.
3. The actors in the enrollment service for Transactive must be Parties.
4. The actors in the enrollment service for VTN/VEN must be a Resource and a Party. The Resource is then enrolled as a VEN and the Party as a VTN in the identified VTN/VEN program.
Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D.
101 First Street, Suite 552
Los Altos, CA 94022
650-949-5274
cell: 408-621-2772
From: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) [mailto:Toby.Considine@unc.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 1:58 PM
To: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [energyinterop] FW: Table 7-1
That sounds right to me.
tc
"It is the theory that decides what can be observed." - Albert Einstein
Toby Considine Chair, OASIS oBIX Technical Committee Facilities Technology Office | | Email: Toby.Considine@ unc.edu blog: www.NewDaedalus.com |
From: Gerald Gray [mailto:gerald.gray@guiding-principle.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 3:14 PM
To: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT)
Subject: Table 7-1
Hi Toby, I remembered seeing your note that you had included versions from both Ed Cazalet and myself regarding table 7-1. The error with Ed’s table is that he has operations named for changing or updating a particular status of an enrollment when there should simply be an update operation with the particular status passed as an attribute. Regardless if an enrollment was being accepted, rejected, or having the enrollment qualification rejected, these are all enrollment status updates.
Does that make sense?
To rectify I think we just remove Ed’s table as in my update I had already taken these stati into consideration (per the note in the comments field).
cell: 517.455.4824| fax: 517.913.6024