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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

smartgrid-discuss message

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

Subject: RE: [smartgrid-discuss] Draft charter for proposed OASIS EnergyInteroperation Technical Committee

All good points.
There's also a lot of ugly in the way the schemas are being done - several styles and "hands" at work.
These issues need removing - because otherwise they will be in there for the next 15 years causing issues and interchange problems and hidden costs.
Fortunately we have the chance to fix these early.
Also - the strength of the CAM toolkit is that you can re-run the checks and validations to make sure the next iteration of the schemas are OK - and not introducing new issues!
Thanks, DW


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [smartgrid-discuss] Draft charter for proposed OASIS
Energy Interoperation Technical Committee
From: Edward Koch <ed@akuacom.com>
Date: Sun, February 15, 2009 6:40 pm
To: "David RR Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>,

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.
-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.
Thanks, DW

-------- 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


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

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.


bill cox
William Cox
Email: wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
+1 908 277 3460 fax

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

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