This issue is to update the .EAP file after consensus is reached on #2 .

Main revisions made to code since auto-generating from the revised .EAP file are:

• Initialize all List<> and string properties to default empty values (instead of defaulting to nulls)
• Define and reference static string lists for the allowed values for Trend, Timing, and ProductionMethodology
• Consolidate the auto-generated KPI_Definition_Time_Range, KPI_Instance_Time_Range, and KPI_Value_Time_Range classes into a single KPI_Time_Range class
• Modify Recurrence and Duration from DateTime to string in KPI_Time_Range
• Pencil in a HierarchyScope element (inclusion in schema to be decided in #3 )
• For each object referenceable by ID, change the auto-generated List to List

  There's also a bit of confusion in the .EAP around references between Definitions, Instances, and Values. Some minor points are documented in the source code files of the addCSharpSource branch.

  Goal is to keep the .EAP file as close as possible to one that can auto-generate C# (and Java) going forward, via the EA MDG plugin. Some of these items (eg initializations to empty) may not be possible in EAP. They should be scriptable, though.

Refer to B2MML

(to do after consensus is reached on the C# code and corresponding .EAP modifications)

Timing to be agreed by XML Committee. Will need MESA TC guidance on where to deploy the NuGet package.

files emailed by Dennis

Original question on KPI-ML syntax:

• Formula
Some APM metrics, eg Cost of Unplanned Downtime (CUD), can be calculated with any of several equations, e.g. either as (quantity X estimated average cost) or as a sum of actual costs over the quantity. The units are the same regardless of which equation is used. Is it appropriate to list two separate Formula elements for the two equations? If so, I’ll do this, as it makes a better example. If not OK, I can just pick one equation and comment on the other variant in Notes.

In the case of PercentRAV and ChangeInPercentRAV, would you recommend combining them into a single KPI Definition with two Formulas, or should they be handled as two related KPIs and files?

In general, is the multiplicity of Formula meant for

• variants of the equation, as in CUD?
• multiple distinct equations where the second and subsequent Formulas define how to calculate components of the first Formula, as in PercentRAV/ChangeInPercentRAV or as in estimating the average cost component for the first CUD equation?
  Or is the KPI-ML standard flexible on this usage aspect?

• Duration and Recurrence
The APM metrics are exemplified as annual, year-over-year measures, although obviously they can be calculated for any time period. I am not clear on the correct syntax to specify an example TimeRange with annual Duration and Recurrence for the KPI Definition or KPI Instance.

The XSD says Duration and Recurrence are of DateTimeType. A natural time period string like “1 year” makes a readable example but will not convert correctly to a DateTime data type. The KPI-ML Word doc discusses TimeRange with respect only to KPI Value, where specific start and end dates obviously make sense. For KPI Definition and KPI Instance, a more generic TimeRange seems suitable. In ISO 8601:2004, all Duration formats start with the letter P and are specified in 4.4.3 in formats such as “P1Y6M” or “P2W” or “P0002-00-00”; all of these will fail to convert to a DateTime or even a TimeSpan.

What would be the best Duration and Recurrence format to use for our examples? Or should I omit these properties for now?

The following license text is provided within AllSchemas.xsd:

        This MESA International work (including specifications, documents, 
        software, and related items) referred to as the KPI Markup Language
        (KPI-ML) is provided by the copyright holders under the following license. 

        Permission to use, copy, modify, or redistribute this Work and its 
        documentation, with or without modification, for any purpose and 
        without fee or royalty is hereby granted provided that MESA
        International is acknowledged as the originator of this Work using the 
        following statement:

        "The KPI Markup Language (KPI-ML) is used courtesy of MESA International."

        In no event shall MESA International, its members, or any 
        third party be liable for any costs, expenses, losses, damages or 
        injuries incurred by use of the Work or as a result of this 
        agreement.

This copy should be inserted into a LICENSE (no extension) file in the root of the repository.