David,
This type of analysis is precisely why
engaging a broader audience like OASIS is a very good thing. A couple of
items worth noting:
-
The
current OpenADR specification contains so called Utility interfaces and schemas
that may not be relevant to the TC within OASIS. These interfaces are part of
the Utilities infrastructure and may or may not be used by the Utilities.
The more important interfaces and schemas are the so called Participant
interfaces which define the interactions between the Energy Providers and their
customers. Those are the ones that are the most relevant and should get
the most attention.
-
Some of
the details of the schemas themselves are always undergoing scrutiny and revision
as more entities validate their implementations against them. There is in
fact a newer revision of the xsd and wsdl files that may be released in the not
too distant future. For example some of the details such as RPC vs
document and the cardinality of some of the attributes have changed recently.
What we should focus on initially though are the conceptual data models
themselves which I anticipate will undergo further modification when the new
pricing and scheduling services are developed as part the effort from the OASIS
TC’s that will be focusing on those issues.
It will no doubt be worthwhile to run the
newest versions of the wsdl and xsd files through your analysis to see if any
of the issues you discovered in your initial analysis have been resolved.
Thanks,
-ed koch
From: David RR Webber
(XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009
11:21 AM
To:
smartgrid-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [smartgrid-discuss]
Draft charter for proposed OASIS Energy Interoperation Technical Committee
On the draft - looks
good.
On the OpenADR schemas
- there's a whole raft of issues, inconsistencies and design gaps that I've
uncovered after running them through CAM and
building dictionary of their content model.
Definately shows that
we need the "OASIS touch" to ensure simple, optimized,
consistent and clean schemas - so that interoperable and lightweight
messaging is provided.
I'm just in the middle
of a new release for CAM - plus I have work I owe on the OASIS EML TC - so will
be next week before I have a chance to write up my findings and submit to
OpenADR - but these would all be aspects I'd see we would want to correct if
taking on the task here in OASIS of having public standard.
--------
Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [smartgrid-discuss] Draft charter for proposed OASIS
Energy Interoperation Technical Committee
From: Glenn Skutt <gskutt@vpt-es.com>
Date: Sun, February 15, 2009 1:02 pm
To: smartgrid-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
Bill,
Thanks for posting this draft; I will read through it to see if I can find the
answers to my questions and concerns and/or throw in suggestions for things I
think need addressing.
But, since I've had these questions and issues for a while I'll take a couple
minutes to throw them out to the group as well:
1.) I am working on bidirectional power management for the grid and this seems
to be something that gets very little mention in this standards work.
Specifically, I am interested in vehicle-to-grid connection that allows for
distributed energy storage solutions. The use of grig-connected vehicles
and other distributed storage mechanisms to allow grid support, spinning
reserve, peak shaving, power quality support, etc. represents a major opportunity
for smart-grid operation, but it also seems to be low priority or
"someday, maybe" in terms of standards.
2.) The mass of different standards and organizations related to energy
control, demand response, home area networks, etc. is dizzying and hard to handle
for a new vendor eying the development of actual hardware. I understand
that the likelihood that any one standard can satisfy the many different
requirements of different players, but it is extremely confusing to come to
this field and find so many different organizations proclaiming themselves as
the "standard". So, I have a concern/question re: whether we
should put a lot of effort into this work or just go work to make sure that one
of the many other standards starts to gain momentum or expands enough to
include issues that drive us to want to have another new one.
As I said, I am interested in reading through this and seeing if I can
contribute anything useful, and hopefully all will become clear.
Thanks and regards,
-Glenn Skutt
---------------------------------------------------
Glenn Skutt
VPT Energy Systems
2200 Kraft Dr. Suite 1200C
Blacksburg, VA 24060
540-443-9214 x4271
gskutt@vpt-es.com
www.vpt-es.com
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009
at 11:51 PM, William Cox <wtcox@coxsoftwarearchitects.com>
wrote:
Please find attached
the draft charter for the proposed OASIS Energy Interoperation Technical
Committee. I've attached a PDF, OpenDocument, and Word versions, all with line
numbers for ease of discussion and review.
We invite you to comment on this list and to determine your interest in joining
this work - please contact me directly if you would like to be listed as a
supporter.
This proposal is being posted to smartgrid-discuss for (guess what!) discussion
and review. The intent of the drafting group is to revise this draft after a
comment period, and then submit the revised charter to the OASIS' Technical
Committee process,.
The core work of the TC is defining XML and Web services interactions for
so-called Automated Demand Response, growing out of work at the Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory Demand
Response Research
Center led by Mary Ann
Piette, who is the convener of the proposed TC. This specific proposal comes
from the context of many discussions in and related to the OpenADR Technical
Advisory Group, GridWise Architecture Council, Grid-Interop, the NIST Smart
Grid project, GridEcon (a conference in March on the economics of the Smart
Grid - http://www.gridecon.com/ ) and many
other places.
The LBNL OpenADR body of work is being extended through two
organizations/entities being created: this proposed OASIS Technical Committee
and a proposed UCAIug OpenADR Task Force. In this innovative collaboration, the
UCAIug, whose members are largely utilities and their suppliers, we will focus
requirements, goals, data models and comments through UCAIug, involving their
membership.
If you're not familiar with OASIS Technical Committee Charters, the statement
of purpose is section (1)(b), the scope is section (1)(c), and identification
of similar or applicable work is section (2)(a).
As usual as charters evolve, the list of supporters is empty in this public
discussion draft, and the list of deliverables and timeline is not included --
the next version will have those sections completed. Again, if you would like
to join this work as a supporter and member of the technical committee, let us
know.
Collaboration with other groups of stakeholders is actively being sought;
please contact me for how to get involved. Other stakeholders include energy
market makers, Independent System Operators (such as those in California,
Texas, New England, the Midwest,
etc), and policy and regulatory groups. For more details, see the draft
charter -- and step forward so we can make this interoperation effort both
broad and effective.
Thanks!
bill cox
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: smartgrid-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: smartgrid-discuss-help@lists.oasis-open.org
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: smartgrid-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: smartgrid-discuss-help@lists.oasis-open.org |