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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

obix message

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

Subject: RE: [obix] oBIX Artifact Naming and Titling... Casing of oBIX/OBIX/etc

A year before I ever saw the acronym oBIX, the CABA group meeting at the first BuilConn created the name open Building Information Exchange and acronym oBIX.


This was outlined on http://www.obix.org/ which demonstrates the original casing. I try to be consistent, although I sometimes find the casing awkward, and am never sure what to do with a sentence that begins with oBIX.


If I recall, having “open” stand out from everything else was a definite style of 2002-2003. I am not sure if it is anymore. I work with another group which does something similar. The NBIMS group uses a lower case “ie” (information exchange) to “brand” all interactions between different deep domains in buildings. COBie, HVACie, SPie, ELie, and even BIMSie (discussed on the last call) are instances of this. I am unsure that the convention of the “little o” still matters.


So, do we want oBIX or OBIX?


If we want oBIX, what is the proper way to use the term at the beginning of a sentence “oBIX is the best standard ever!” or in a title “OBIX Encodings”


Replies to group, please.




"If something is not worth doing, it`s not worth doing well "    -- Peter Drucker

Toby Considine
TC9, Inc

OASIS TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar

OASIS TC Editor: EMIX, Energy Interoperation

SGIP Smart Grid Architecture Committee


Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Phone: (919)619-2104

blog: http://www.NewDaedalus.com


From: Paul Knight [mailto:paul.knight@oasis-open.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 5:16 PM
To: Considine, Toby
Cc: tcadmin@lists.oasis-open.org; obix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [obix] oBIX Artifact Naming and Titling...


Hi Toby and all,


Thanks for asking.  It's certainly best to think about these things before publication!



The first two titles are quite flexible, with respect to supporting the case your mentioned, "We anticipate that at a future time, a new encodings document could be made, or a new binding, without creating a [oBIX] 1.2."  that is, the Version can be incremented in the title without regard to the associated OBIX/oBIX versioning.  I would suggest that the text of the Abstract and Introduction sections of each document should clearly identify the OBIX/oBIX versions supported.


Enough for now... please feel free to ask for clarification, support, etc.


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