MeteringConfiguration

[corymosiman12]

Currently, the auc:MeteringConfiguration element is a child element of an auc:Utility. If we assume that an auc:Scenario/auc:ResourceUses/auc:ResourceUse should be defined to represent an actual WaterResource or EnergyResource, then I believe it makes more sense to define the auc:MeteringConfiguration element as a child of auc:ResourceUse. This way, a Utility serving potentially multiple resources (water, gas, electricity, steam, etc.) could still be metered differently for each individual resource.

Thoughts? @nllong @markborkum

If agree, I will make formal proposal.

[markborkum]

From the Audit Template perspective, it makes sense to keep things as they are. The Audit Template "energy supply source" class is mapped to/from the auc:Utility element and the "metering type" attribute (of said class) is mapped to/from the auc:MeteringConfiguration child element. Audit Template uses the auc:UtilityID element to relate auc:ResourceUse and auc:Utility elements when needed.

[corymosiman12]

I see. So the assumption in ATT is that an auc:Utility is created for every 'Energy Supply Source' (that's what it looks like from an XML export). I just disagree with this implementation, since I think others would assume that a Utility can serve multiple resources. Let's discuss next call.

[markborkum]

Correct. In Audit Template, there is a one-to-one association between "energy supply sources" (auc:Utility) and "energy types" (auc:FuelTypes). In future versions, this could be generalized to a one-to-many association.

[corymosiman12]

Cool. Let's keep this open as discussion. As I get documentation together for how we think these concepts should be modeled, we can discuss further.