CIM Issues #5963
Updated by Todd Viegut 10 months ago
Reviewed on 15-Jun-2023 in Oslo: Decisions: 1. Change the description of mRID to: Master resource identifier issued by a model authority. The mRID is unique within an exchange context. Global uniqueness is easily achieved by using a UUID, as specified in IETF RFC 4122, for the mRID. The use of UUID is strongly recommended. 2. The rdf:ID/rdf:about will be a 552 issue & JSON-LD @ID will be a 553 issue. This will not be tied to the UML. In the 552 rdf:ID/rdf:about is to be decoupled from the mRID attribute and explicitly prescribed to be a UUID. The same being true in the 553. This will allow both serializations to have the same identifier, generated by the same rules to produce the same IRIs. The legacy formats will be based on local business rules instead of standards-based rules. 3. We currently have in Section 8.7 in Part 100 Ed 2.0 the new ObjectIdentificationRevisionSets profile (i.e. for object registries). We need to introduce a new similar profile (RDF-based) and include in the 552. See if we can utilize the existing profile to generate the RDFS or if there needs to be additional work done to the profile. To clarify, this bullet point addresses the identifier now tied to serialization. (Additionally reviewed on 05-Jul-2023 and the below sub bullet points have been added for clarification). - The existing documentation (for the latest (Names, NameType and NameTypeAuthority) proposal has been forwarded to Chavdar. This is what we agreed needs to be added to the 301 Ed. 8.0. - Then we need to have a discussion with respect to whether an additional profile is necessary and which would be included in the 552. - Svein has suggested including currently parked (or some variation) of the draft of the "Naming Service Specification" (i.e. IEC 61970-454). Would need to be revisited and collectively agreed upon but this may be one approach. If so the sugggestion is to include in the IEC 61970-452