There are approximately 60 enumerations in the schema. Rather than create new tables adding 60 new definitions/entries to the spec, at this point I'd go with your suggestion to work descriptions into the text at appropriate places to the extent needed to clarify their use. -A Toby Considine wrote, On 6/15/2011 4:25 PM: > EMIX has numerous strings that we do not intend to supply normative > definitions for. In some cases, doing so would slip over into Market Design, > or Interaction Design, each out of scope for an information model. > > > Since May, we have opted to "de-tableize" such lists. > Alternate proposal is that we put them in Tables ("the Sledgehammer") > > Schema is normative in any case... > > Opinions from the TC? > > tc > > "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not > become a monster, and if you stare long into an abyss, the abyss also stares > into you." - Fredrich Nietzche > > Toby Considine > TC9, Inc > 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 > > > >
Original Message----- > From: Aaron Snyder [ mailto:aaron@enernex.com ] > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 7:13 PM > To: 'toby.considine@gmail.com' > Subject: Re: Emailing: emix-1-0-spec-wd30 - afs.zipx > > Cool. > > Then it should state that even more explicitly inm the standard(the > sledgehammer approach). > > Aaron > Sent from one of the several mobile devices I carry around. > >