Too clever by half. For this conversation, assume UTC, leaving out DST and related issues. I’m looking for whether there should be a deeper meaning when applied to services. For people, if a meeting starts at 12:00 and goes for an hour, one could argue that since they always start at 12:05, this means that it is scheduled until 1:05….
For services, I am interested in what is the required / expected state of the service at 3:01.
Let’s say I schedule a room for 78 degrees between 2-3.
Let’s say I schedule the same room for 72 degrees between 3-4.
Let’s say that I know it takes 10 minutes to go between the temperatures.
If the first schedule is in response to DR for Energy, then I am committed to not setting the thermostat *until* 3:00
If the second schedule is in response to CEO arriving for a meeting, then I am committed to getting the room temperature down *by* 3:00
There may be real differences at the edges point for non-instantaneous services
tc
"If something is not worth doing, it`s not worth doing well" - Peter Drucker
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
| | Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Phone: (919)619-2104 http://www.tcnine.com/
blog: www.NewDaedalus.com |
From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 10:20 AM
To: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Cc: smartgrid-interest@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [smartgrid-interest] Is there a difference? (Time and Schedule)
The only snag I see with 2) is this:
and I assume for Duration is has to be fully qualified - e.g. 01:00:00 and not just 1
p.s. They are using military time, right?!
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [smartgrid-interest] Is there a difference? (Time and
Schedule)
From: "Toby Considine" <Toby.Considine@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, June 10, 2010 10:07 am
To: <smartgrid-interest@lists.oasis-open.org>
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?
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it” -- Upton Sinclair.
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 | | |