Untangling work, use, transfer in scheduling
I'm thinking that the scheduling milestone should be done without resolving transfer if possible, as that is already defined for later, and is another big "can of worms". So part of this is to see if we can separate out the transfer aspects of scheduling for later. Or if not, then so be it.
Also there are some differences in work and usage, in that work does not involve a material resource (we do not too much like the term "human resources" and would like to work towards human agency as people and democratic groups, therefore don't foresee people as EconomicResources).
Copying from #394 (closed) to here, and will delete from that issue:
Summarizing the quantities we may need to think about for usage:
- Number used of a larger stock resource.
- Actual time used (a QuantityValue)
- Duration on a schedule (reserved, available, others can't use it)
- Duration (larger) where the usage occurred - like (10 hours) used in the last month
- Duration of the actual usage event, where the resource was used as input to a process. [edit]
Looking at similarities and differences with work:
- No material resource, always one provider agent
- Actual time worked (a QuantityValue)
- Duration on a schedule (reserved, available, others can't schedule the person to work)
- Duration (larger) where the work occurred - like (10 hours) worked in the last month
- Duration of the actual work event, where the work was input to a process. [edit]
Work is the same except 1.
[edit] I think that 3. involves transfers. Although it is also a chunk of time on a schedule, so could be represented as an interval or duration.