Subject: time table revisions 3
ad hoc ' ers :
one last time before we shoot it over to mark and isas . thanks for the
comments , good catches .
>
as far as comment # 1 ( lca vs . ppt vs . pst ) , this gets into the white paper
idea discussed last wednesday . lisa was going to tackle this ( she ' s
given - up sleeping to fit it in ) and i ' d asked her to distinguish between
referencing time in a product definition versus time in a process
description . but i believe she is on vacation fighting forest fires .
this table is used in a process ( submission and assessment of e - tags ) and is
some - what independent of the time zone ( s ) that the product or commodity is
referenced by . guess i ' m letting my preference slip in here - since we are
dealing with a daily process , the timing table should use a prevailing time
reference ( e . g . , lca or ppt , etc . ) and not a " fixed " time zone ( e . g . , pst ,
cst , etc . ) .
enough of me , let ' s talk about your comments to the latest table . if there
are none , it ' ll go to mark at cob tuesday july 3 rd .
robert harshbarger
puget sound energy
oasis trading manager
425 . 882 . 4643 ( desk )
206 . 604 . 3251 ( cell )
- tag time table draft _ rev 3 . doc