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

*Subject*: **[OASIS Issue Tracker] (ENERGYINTEROP-696) Mantissa and Scale throughout spec**

*From*:**OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>***To*: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org*Date*: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 16:37:00 +0000 (UTC)

[ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/ENERGYINTEROP-696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Toby Considine updated ENERGYINTEROP-696: ----------------------------------------- Proposal: More than Confusing, not even wrong... In table 3.3 Scale Exponent that specifies the size of the Resource Unit. For example, a Product denominated in Megawatts has a Scale of 6. In Table 5,1 Stream Scale The Scale is the exponent that determines the size of the Resource. For example, if Scale is 3 and the Resource is Watts, then the value is in kW. If the Scale is 6, then the value is in MW. Stream Price Granularity Price granularity expressed as an exponent. Applies to all Intervals in the Stream. Not required for all Facets. For example, if the price granularity is -3, and the value is 1500, the price is 1.500 currency units. In Table 8.2 Quantity Scale Q_SCALE The exponent of the Quantity. For example, a product denominated in kilowatts has a Q_SCALE of 3. > Mantissa and Scale throughout spec > ---------------------------------- > > Key: ENERGYINTEROP-696 > URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/ENERGYINTEROP-696 > Project: OASIS Energy Interoperation TC > Issue Type: Bug > Components: cts > Affects Versions: CTSPR01 > Environment: H Walter JohnsonÂhttps://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/energyinterop-comment/202111/msg00007.html > Reporter: Toby Considine > Assignee: William Cox > Priority: Major > Labels: CLARITY, PREREQ > > |Interesting work. Thanks for the opportunity to review. Here are a few things I noticed as I read through the doc.Â > The definition of *Scale* in Table 3-3 appears to be incorrect. *Scale*Âis defined there as the *Mantissa that specifies the size of the Resource Unit* and the example given states that *megawatts*Âhas a mantissa of 6. Assuming we are working in base 10, the prefix mega- refers to the 6th power of 10 (10^6), where 6 is the EXPONENT of the number, not the mantissa. In standard scientific notation, *mantissa* refers to the digits without the 10^n part. Therefore, the definition of *scale* should be the EXPONENT of the size prefix (*mega* or 6 in the example), not the mantissa (the fractional part or *precision* of the number).Â > Â > Nevertheless, the effect of the definition of scale is correct: the example for *Size*Â(5 kW), with the explanation that the 5 is the size and 3 is the scale, makes sense, since the scale part of this is kilo-Ã (10^3) and thus the exponent (NOT the mantissa) of 5 x 10^3 is 3. But why is Size constrained to be an *integer*? Why not allow a Product to have a fractional Size (for example "0.5 MW") rather than requiring this to be expressed as *500 kW* (or even *500000 W*)?Â > Â > I'm not sure that I understand the example of *Stream Payload Mantissa* in Table 5-1, but it seems to contain the same confusion between mantissa and exponent. > Â > The definition of *Quantity Scale*Âin Table 6-2 definitely confuses mantissa and exponent.| -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.3#803004)

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