Skip to content
GitLab
Projects Groups Snippets
  • /
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
  • Sign in
  • C citygml-energy
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
    • Locked Files
  • Issues 29
    • Issues 29
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
    • Iterations
    • Requirements
  • Merge requests 0
    • Merge requests 0
  • CI/CD
    • CI/CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
    • Test Cases
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Environments
    • Releases
  • Packages and registries
    • Packages and registries
    • Container Registry
  • Monitor
    • Monitor
    • Incidents
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value stream
    • CI/CD
    • Code review
    • Insights
    • Issue
    • Repository
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Snippets
    • Snippets
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • energyade
  • citygml-energy
  • Issues
  • #148
Closed
Open
Issue created Nov 27, 2017 by Moritz Robert Lauster@mlausterMaintainer

Eliminate inconsistencies between ThermalBoundary and ThermalOpening

Created by: JoachimBenner

In the FeatureType ThermalBoundary, the properties area and staticConstruction (better construction, see #147 (closed)) are optional. On the other hand, in ThermalBoundary the corresponding properties are both mandatory. There is no real reason for this inconsistency. Furthermore, if an explicit geometry of the ThermalOpening is available (surfaceGeometry), the area can be calculated.

Proposal: Define area and openingConstruction (construction, see #147 (closed)) as optional (0..1) properties.

Assignee
Assign to
Time tracking