From:	Hess, Theresa
Sent:	Friday, March 01, 2002 2:14 PM
To:	Bill Griffith (E-mail); Dale Davis (E-mail); Hess, Theresa; Kim Van Pelt (E-mail); Mark Gracey (E-mail); Paul Love (E-mail)
Subject:	EDM Request – XML

The EDM Subcommittee held a conference call on Thursday, March 28.  I want to bring one request to your attention (see attached R01020).  I have a feeling we'll hear about the outcome from Boswell or the NAESB office.

Dick Brooks of Systrends requested the addition of the identifier 'XML' to be used in the 'input-format' data element, which is in the HTTP request.  This data element describes the data format of the file that is being transmitted across the Internet.  The current identifiers (or code values) are:  'X12', 'FF' and 'error'.  The table of the Internet EDM elements is on page 2 of Tab 6 of the EDM book.

Dick does technical work for ERCOT.  They want to utilize the GISB EDM standard and have instructed him to implement according to the GISB EDM standards.  I understand his dilemma.  However, GISB has an XML pilot project group which has not met since last July.  We should not add the 'XML' identifier when GISB is still determining whether they want to develop and utilize XML standards.  GISB membership has not shown an interest in participating in the XML pilot.  It was suggested that we add the identifier with the rationale that it is for use by the pilot group.  I don't believe we should add the identifier as a standard while XML is being pilot tested - especially when the pilot is going nowhere.

Also, I feel we shouldn't be adding things to our standards for the other quadrants' use while they're in development.  How long will their development take?  How many other requests will be submitted to our quadrant to be standardized in the interim?  I think we would be setting a bad precedent.  Especially when the request is for something that our quadrant hasn't shown any interest in and may determine we do not want to add to our standards.

During the call, I noted that he is requesting an addition to the Wholesale Gas Quadrant standards.  I don't think he realized that these are not overall NAESB standards and that his quadrant would need to adopt them before they apply to that quadrant.  Having one set of EDM standards across NAESB would be ideal, but is not likely - particularly in the short term.  Other quadrants are using XML and WGQ is piloting (sort of).  He was flabbergasted that NAESB could have more than one EDM standard.

At the end of the EDM discussion, Dick made a motion to add the 'XML' identifier; there was no second.  The request was not declined by EDM; it remains on their list of active requests to be addressed.  In the meantime, Dick will be looking for a solution that will work for everyone.  The next EDM call is scheduled for Wednesday, March 6, 9:00 - 11:00 CCT.

Randy  -- feel free to add to my notes.

Thanks,
Theresa