I am thinking about information and conformance in schedules, and I want to ask for a broader perspective than in the WS-Calendar committee. Note I am *not asking* for contributions to the committee, I am asking for perspectives on what the standard should support. Note that there is always a tension between “support everything” and “interoperation”
The WS-Calendar current draft is out for public comment. It is in many ways a WS instantiation of iCalendar and related IETF specifications. At its core is a series of time slices based upon the well-known vtodo object. Each slice may reference a usage a price, or any other information artifact. Assume it is a series or energy prices or a series of DR requests…..
As I meditate on this object I arrive at the following question:
What’s the difference in *actions*, and in *performance* between
A) Do X beginning at 2:00 for an hour duration
B) Do X beginning at 2:00 for and ending at 3:00
C) Do X for an hour ending at 3:00
All are possible using the VTODO data structure.
One (C) is not allowed if I understand correctly
Within any interaction, it would be simpler, cleaner to allow only (A) or (B)
Do we need to allow both?
Does B have a finite stop and A does not?
Why would we support both?
tc
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it” -- Upton Sinclair.
Toby Considine
TC9, Inc OASIS Technical Advisory Board
TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar TC Editor: EMIX, EnergyInterop U.S. National Inst. of Standards and Tech. Smart Grid Architecture Committee | | |