refactor measure tagging and naming

[MatthewSteen]

Following up from my Slack post...

Proposal

The BCL refactor reminded me of some thoughts I've had about measure tagging and naming that I think would be an improvement.

1. I think we should standardize measure tags around design disciplines and subtags around corresponding systems (or other standardized convention). This would align them with the main sections of building plans (General, Architectural, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, etc.). For example, G101 for General info (codes used), A101 for Architectural first floor plan, E101 for Electrical schedules, M101 for Mechanical schedules, P101 for Plumbing schedules, etc.
   The relevant standards that come to mind are:

   • U.S. National CAD Standard
   • UniFormat

2. I think we should also automatically prefix the measure directory with an abbreviated main tag to help sort directories of measures (e.g. My Measures, GitHub Gems). As part of this change, existing 🐫Case directories could be changed to 🐍_case.

Example

Here's a summary of what I'm thinking for major/minor tag categories with the measure directory prefix in parentheses. I'm open to discussion, suggestions, and thoughts. @DavidGoldwasser and @nllong liked the idea, but we would need to find budget/scope/time to do it.

General (gen)	Architectural (arch)	Electrical (elec)	Mechanical (mech)	Plumbing (plum)	Reporting (rep)
Schedules	Form	Controls	Controls	Controls	QAQC
People	Opaque	Equipment	Heating	Equipment (gas)	Troubleshooting
Economics	Fenestration	Lighting	Cooling	Service Water Heating
	Construction Sets	Generation (solar electric)	Heat Rejection	Generation (solar thermal)
	Daylighting		Energy Recovery	Water Use
	Infiltration		Distribution (fans, pumps)	Distribution (SWH pumps)
	Space Types (architectural programming)		Ventilation
			Whole System
			Refrigeration

[nllong]

This is looking great. I'm slightly concerned with have parenthetic statements in the individual categories. (e.g., Distribution (fans, pumps).) Can we be explicit here and list out each of the categories so Distribution Fans, Distribution Pumps.

Also, I think we should have a call with Amanda Webb and Apoorv from OSU who are running the RP-1836 on categorizing and characterizing ECM. They can also give us insight on where they think RP1836 will end up.

[MatthewSteen]

@nllong thanks for the feedback. The parentheses are just for clarifying examples. I tried to use the existing sub-tags in the example table, but would suggest revising those too based on consensus/standardization when this gets done. Coordinating with the ASHRAE RP on ECMs (cringe...EEMs?) would be great.

Some other thoughts...

• This would also have implications for the OpenStudio Application and its BCL/Measure UI and I'm not sure how much work that would be.
• Measure gems could be reorganized around the main tags to make it more clear where they live (general, arch, elec, mech, plum, reporting, etc.). There's been some confusion about the existing gem repositories, so this could be another improvement unless there's a strong case/reason for the existing repos. For example...
  • openstudio-general-measures-gem
  • openstudio-architectural-measures-gem
  • openstudio-electrical-measures-gem
  • openstudio-mechanical-measures-gem
  • openstudio-plumbing-measures-gem
  • openstudio-reporting-measures-gem