Mandatory relation between ThermalZone and ThermalBoundary?

[oliviertournaire]

I am wondering if the boundedBy relation between ThermalZone and ThermalBoundary is really mandatory. The cardinality is set to 1..*.

However, if one just want to model a building and attached the properties isCooled or isHeated, he has to define a ThermalZone. Sounds good. However, as long as you define a ThermalZone, you are obliged to also model a ThermalBoundary. I do not think this is really necessary.

Your opinions?

[JoachimBenner]

The mandatory relation boundedBy from ThermalZone to ThermalBoundary is not new, it was included in all previous versions of the Energy ADE. I think, for a real simulation it does not make sense to model a ThermalZone without one or more ThermalBoundary. You are right that for the simple case we only want to express that a building is heated and/or cooled, the actual model is a little bit to complex, because we need a ThermalZone object and a (dummy) ThermalBoundary object. But, instead of defining boundedBy as optional, I would propose to define isHeated and isCooled also as ADE-attributes of AbstractBuilding.

I propose to keep the mandatory relation for 0.7.0 and postpone the problem for version 0.8.0

[oliviertournaire]

OK, agree with the proposal of having attributes isHeated and isCooled at in the ADE extended AbstractBuilding class.

[RomainNouvel]

I understand your issue, but this will lead to a redundancy/conflict if a AbstractBuilding with attribute isHeated has ThermalZone without this attribute (or isHeated = false). In the guidelines, we've defined the ThermalZone as "the volume unit for heat/cool energy demand calculation.". Then, we won't need the information if an AbstractBuilding is heated or not if a ThermalZone is not defined.

For some statistical models, we might use the ThermalZone without ThermalBoundaries. Then, I would rather propose to set the cardinality of boundedBy relation to (0..) instead of (1..). Do you agree?

[gioagu]

It seems reasonable to me, so I agree - unless we come up with some bigger issues

[JoachimBenner]

Making the relation boundedBy optional surely causes no problems. In any case, I think that attributes "isHeated" and "isCooled" make sense on the general CityGML level, but to regard this level is not the job of this working group.

[JoachimBenner]

Can we agree on this change for version 0.9.0:

The relation boundedBy (ThermalZone --> ThermalBoundary) has cardinality **0..***

[RomainNouvel]

I vote for it.

[eRolland]

I vote for it too.

[gioagu]

OK for me