2014 KA Minutes of the Workshop: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
Line 128: Line 128:
[[File:ADE_Energy_Structure.bmp|right|300px|ADE_Energy_Structure]]
[[File:ADE_Energy_Structure.bmp|right|300px|ADE_Energy_Structure]]
Three different forms of ADE Energy implementation were brought up:  
Three different forms of ADE Energy implementation were brought up:  
# a uniform ADE Energy, integrating all developments of the WG
# a uniform ADE Energy, integrating all developments of the working groups
# a mandatory ADE Energy core on one side, and on the other side an optional extended ADE Energy (inspired from the Core3D and Extended3D from INSPIRE)
# a mandatory ADE Energy core on one side, and on the other side an optional extended ADE Energy (inspired from the Core3D and Extended3D from INSPIRE)
# an ADE Energy core linked to several ADE Energy modules corresponding to different attributes categories (i.e. time-series, material, occupancy and energy systems).
# an ADE Energy core linked to several ADE Energy modules corresponding to different attributes categories (i.e. time-series, material, occupancy and energy systems).
Line 135: Line 135:


* Levels of Detail covered by the ADE Energy
* Levels of Detail covered by the ADE Energy
J.M. Bahu prefered to focus first on the main application of this ADE Energy: the building modelled in LoD1-2.<br/>
J.M. Bahu proposed to focus first on the main application of this ADE Energy: consider the building in LoD1-2.<br/>
R. Nouvel reported that the ADE Energy has been from the beginning developed as flexible as possible, potentially compatible with all CityGML Levels of Details (LoD1 to LoD4). Then he suggested to define a UML schema covering all LoDs, and see the different feebacks during the test phase.<br/>  
R. Nouvel reported that the ADE Energy has been from the beginning developed as flexible as possible, potentially compatible with all CityGML Levels of Details (LoD1 to LoD4). Then he suggested to define a UML schema covering all LoDs, and see the different feebacks during the test phase.<br/>  
This last proposition found finally consensus.
This last proposition found finally consensus.


* Window definition
* Window definition
RWTH and HFT Stuttgart suggested to define a semantical window object (related to a shading object) in a similar way that for ThermalBoundarySurface. Without LoD3 or more, the position of the windows is unknown, only the window surface area is relevant.
RWTH and HFT Stuttgart suggested to define a semantic window object (related to a shading object) in a similar way that for ThermalBoundarySurface. Without LoD3 or more, the position of the windows is unknown, only the window surface area is relevant.


* Dissemination
* Dissemination