You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We frequently speak about Energy ADE modules like "Building physics module" or "Energy systems module", but formally speaking the UML model has no modular structure. This at least hinders the maintenance of the data model.
Therefore, for a first official version a number of sub-folders should be integrated in the main folder EnergyADE of the UML model:
EnergyADE Core
Building Physics
Occupance
Material and Construction
Energy systems
Time series and schedules
In each of these sub-folders the corresponding UML elements and diagrams are aggeegated. It is debatable whether this modular structure of the conceptional model is also reflected in the GML encoding (separate namespaces and XML-schema files for different modules). I personally strongly prefer to stay with one Energy ADE namespace and one schema file.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We frequently speak about Energy ADE modules like "Building physics module" or "Energy systems module", but formally speaking the UML model has no modular structure. This at least hinders the maintenance of the data model.
Therefore, for a first official version a number of sub-folders should be integrated in the main folder EnergyADE of the UML model:
In each of these sub-folders the corresponding UML elements and diagrams are aggeegated. It is debatable whether this modular structure of the conceptional model is also reflected in the GML encoding (separate namespaces and XML-schema files for different modules). I personally strongly prefer to stay with one Energy ADE namespace and one schema file.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: