GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Closing Plenary
description
Transcript of GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Closing Plenary
GEO Task AR-07-02
AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopClosing Plenary
NCAR Mesa Laboratory
25-26 September 2008
Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008
Start Time Topic Speaker
1330 Reports from sessions (10 min *10)
Session leaders
1430 Break (15 min)
1445 Reports from sessions, continued Session leaders
1525 Task Planning: communications, schedule, web presences
George Percivall
1555 General Discussion All
1700 Closing
Agenda – 25 September
Agenda – 26 September
Thank you!
• NCAR hosting of the Kickoff– Richard Anthes, Peter Backlund,
Carol Park, Donna Bonnetti• IEEE for organizing events all week
• OGC acknowledges sponsorship from– European Commission– European Space Agency– USGS– ERDAS– Northrop Grumman
Session Leader responsibilities - Thanks!
• Introduce and organize themselves • Create an agenda for the session• Introduce the session at the opening plenary• Lead the session at the kickoff• Present the outcomes to the closing plenary
Beyond the kickoff we will need leaders for the working groups through March 2009
Slide 7
GEO Task AR-07-02
Architecture Implementation Pilot
• Lead incorporation of contributed components consistent with the GEOSS Architecture…
• …using a GEO Web Portal and a GEOSS Clearinghouse search facility
• …to access services through GEOSS Interoperability Arrangements
• …support GEOSS Societal Benefit Areas
Pilot Kickoff Objectives
• Begin the Execution Phase of the Pilot
• Refine and develop – Collaboration and interoperability goals– Detailed design based on CFP
Architecture. – User scenarios suitable for demonstration.
• Develop detailed plan and schedule for the Execution Phase
Slide originally from Shawn McClureCIRA, Colorado State University
Why participate in GEOSS AIP?
• Better awareness of community interoperability efforts
• Better understanding and use of proposed GEOSS standards
• Standardization of intra- and inter-system data exchange
• Leveraging and reuse of existing resources through service-chaining
• Increased value of existing development investments• Improved resource availability and decision-making
for end users
AIP-2 Kickoff Sessions
• SBA, Communities of Practice, Scenario Sessions– Disaster Response– Climate Change and Biodiversity– Renewable Energy– Air Quality and Health
• Transverse Technology sessions:– Catalogues and Clearinghouse – Service and Dataset Description– Data Product Access: service, schema, encoding– Sensors and Models Access: service, schema, encoding– Workflow for derived product and alert generation– Clients: portals and applications clients – Test Facility for Service Registration
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Disaster ResponseSession Results – Work Plan Ahead
Stuart Frye Caribbean Flood Team
Ron Lowther Northrop Grumman
Didier Giacobbo Spot Image
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Session Primary Participants & PresentersPresented at Kickoff
Participant Title
Y Morris Brill, Michele Mayorga (NGC)
Northrop Grumman (NGC) Response to GEOSS AIP-II CFP
Y Stu Frye (NASA) Caribbean Flood Pilot Sensor Web
Y Didier Giacobbo (Spot Image) Spot Image Response to the GEOSS AIP-2 CFP
Y Jeff de La Beaujardiere (NOAA IOOS)
NOAA IOOS Data Integration Framework (DIF) Contribution to the GEO AIP-II
Ken McDonald (NOAA) and Dr. Liping Di (GMU)
NOAA-NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS joint efforts for persistent GOES data services, weather scenarios, Web… services/ workflows
Y Prof. Natalia Kussul, SRI NASU-NSAU (GEO-Ukraine)
Sensor Web for Flood Applications
Y Satoko H. MIURA and Kengo AIZAWA (JAXA)
Catalog Server for ALOS data
Y Steve Del Greco (NCDC) The Next Generation Weather Radar system
SURA/SCOOP, GoMOOS, and NIMSAT
Communication of Disasters and Mitigation of Post-Disaster Damage
ICAN (Oregan State U.) International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN)
Y (CNES) CENTRE NATIONAL D’ETUDES SPATIALES
Disaster Charter Catalog Server for GML-EO Metadata Harvesting and HMA-compliant Web Services Access
Y (ERDAS) The Earth to Business Company
Geospatial Collaboration and Information Sharing Infrastructure for GEOSS
Session Summary and Way Ahead
• Problems to solve:– Determine future view to have data/products
available at the end versus just data crunching– How to cross flow work between SBA and transverse
technology groups– Work plan and schedule development for the rest of
the AIP-II
Session Summary and Way Ahead
• What is missing and still needed: services, components, and data/product gaps– Services and components limited and not fully ready,
have to start and build– Growing availability of data and product providers for
persistent exemplars—want to start and build– Complete inventory of the participants components
and services and ensure registration– Expand participation to cover all disasters not just
floods
Session Summary and Way Ahead
• Paradigm shifts instead of evolutionary development:– Integration needed to link both spectrums:
• Architecture/technology• Data provisions
– Some satellites give a continuous global baseline but others not unless we can get a disaster declared—work needed for fast response
– International Charter Web Services provision
Session Summary and Way Ahead
• Work plan ahead: – Not enough time – WG participants need to further
refine cross flow areas and collaboration among participants to develop work plans ahead
– It’s not all about the demo—must work on transverse technology, integration providers, capability to discover archives, rapid data processing…
– We will structure our scenario to provide liaison to specific transverse technology areas
– Session leads will propose future telecon schedules, email, list membership and wiki moderation
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Climate Change and BiodiversitySession Summary
S. Nativi (IP3 Team and CNR),
Gary Geller (IP3 Team and NASA JPL)
GEO AIP-2 Kickoff
September 26th, 2008
Agenda (Thursday, 25th 13:00 – 14:15)
I part: The contextGlobal Federated Climate and Weather systems D. Middleton (NCAR and WMO)
Global Biodiversity systems: GeoBON G. Geller (NASA JPL and IP3 Team) and S. Nativi (CNR and IP3 Team)
Interoperability process: The IP3 demonstrations S.Nativi (CNR and IP3 Team)
II part: Interoperability Architecture: Some AIP-2 PrincipalNOAA NCDC Response Christina Lief
USGS Response Doug Norbert
BKG Response Juergen Walther
III part: AIP-2 Interoperability experiments & shared use scenariosAn interoperability test framework to share resources All
Possible collaborative Use scenarios All
Conclusions All
Session Notes• 17-20 person attending. A small room !• Good discussion on the presentations• There was a general agreement on the need to try to
test resources interoperability in order to enable common use scenarios and facilitate their registration in the GEOSS registries – Interoperability will be pursued by publishing
standard interfaces – It is possible to submit some “interoperability
arrangements” proposals to SIF
Session Notes
• Interoperability framework for common CC & Bio use scenarios
IP3 Clearinghouse/Mediator
GBIF resources
TOPS resources
IP3 ENM server
ACRF CMBE
ACRF access services
USGS Maps
USGS services
NOAA GOSIC
NOAA NEXRAD
NOAA NIDIS
GEOSS Registries GEO-Portals &Clearinghouse Catalogs
Inter. Arrangement
Inter. StandardIS
IS
IS
ISIA
IA
IS
IS
IS
IA
Session Notes
• Major Challenge
– Get Data not only maps
• To deal with data multi-disciplinary specific models and encodings
• To explicit the disciplinary knowledge: the mediator role
– Get scientists involved in the use scenarios definition and implementation
• Start from the IP3 cross-disciplinary process experience
• Consider the ESRI story board experience
Session Notes
• Some Impediments– Data policy and security constraints– Huge amount of heterogeneous data possibly
useful for use scenarios– Several Communities involved
• Common use scenarios were discussed– CC impact on Biodiversity for the Polar area– Vegetation Change– Protected areas monitoring ?
Schedule
Task Deadline
To send comments and contributions on use scenarios
20 Oct
To look at possible scenarios already defined in other international projects/programmes
20 Nov
To set up formal use scenario(s) 15 Dec
… according to AIP-2 milestones
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Energy SBA Session Report
Ellsworth LeDrew, University of Waterloo, Canada
Thierry Ranchin, Mines ParisTech, France
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Scenario objectives
• Support the SBA Energy by developing services providing irradiance data among other parameters
• Simulating the case of the sitting of a solar power plant.
?
What we have in hands
Meteorological data
• Access through WSDL to databases:– Monthly means of solar irradiance
– Min, max and mean values of air temperature at 2 m
– Min, max and mean values of relative humidity at 2 m
– HelioClim 3 time series of irradiance (year 2005)
– Forecast of meteo data at surface for 3 days to 3 hours
– SOLEMI time series irradiance data
– NASA–SSE–HelioClim 1 times series of daily irradiance
• Other types of access
– Real time information meteorological data
• Providers: Mines ParisTech, NCAR, DLR, NASA, Rutherford Appleton Lab
Geographical Information
• Hydrological information for US from NOAA
• Worldwide Geographical information from USGS
Tools
• PV assessments through PVGIS Server (JRC)
• Stochastical generation of test datasets for modelling of PV system (MeteoTest)
• PV Production calculator (MeteoTest)
• Computation of renewable energy parameters (NASA)
What are the missing datasets ?
• Inventory is needed for having a worldwide coverage. Use of GEO Portals and Registry but also other portals (hydrological network, grids, local demand, roads, environmental and biodiversity information, risks and hazards maps, …)
• Help from the Data and Products team
In the Workflow domain, what do we need?
Workflow
• Help form the Workflow Team
• Enterprise modeling that will lead to the workflow design
• Information and Computational Technology views for linking to GEOSS
• Recommendations for the setting of the service
• Help on technical bottlenecks
AIP-2 Master Schedule
• Within the coming month:– Planned meeting between Workflow Team,
INCOSE and the Team
• For Nov 2008:– Key design decisions– Refined agenda for setting up the service
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Air Quality and Health Scenario
Stefan Falke, Rudy Husar, Frank Lindsay, David McCabe
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Who does the air quality scenario benefit?The scenario is quite broad and ambitious,
structured around the needs of three end-users:
- A policy-maker, needing synthetic assessments of long-range transport of air pollution
- An air quality manager, assessing whether an episodequalifies as an ’exceptional event’ under AQ regulationsExceptional events such as fires, dust storms are not counted as an exceedance under AQ regulations. In US, petitioners can use any applicable data to show exceptionality of an event.
- The public, needing information on air quality now and tomorrowEnables individuals, families to adjust plans if air quality is/will be poor;allows health community, other decision-makers to plan for episodes
Respondents Presenting: ESIP-AQ cluster, DataFed, NASA Giovanni,EPA AIRNow, VIEWS-TSS, George Mason U., Northrop-Grumman
Air Quality Session
• What we want to do: SBA goals have been suggested by scenarioVery Broad and Ambitious! Searching for fusion / harmonization of many types, domains of AQ data
• What we have to work with: Data and Tools presented by: AIRNow, Northrop Grumman, VIEWS-TSS, Giovanni
• How to make it all work: GMU, DataFed: (service-oriented webservice chaining)
ESIP-AQ cluster(community AQ portal, catalog, to directly interface w/ GCI)
Air Quality Session
Results of Discussion • Group will define an approach to populate GCI with
AQ components and services by working with the ESIP-AQ community catalog
This can happen within the AIP schedule
• Much discussion of how the interface between GCI and community catalog, will work
The architecture is not final, but the current iteration needs to be made clearer for stakeholders
Next steps: WE HAVE YOUR EMAIL
Workspace is live on OGC network:
http://www.ogcnetwork.net/node/407
Telecons will be set up shortly
AQ SBA will work with transverse tech WGs to clarify architecture
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Service and Dataset Description (1C)Session Overview
Josh Lieberman
Doug Nebert
Ted Haberman
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Thursday 1300 - 1430
Session Agenda
• Overview of metadata requirements and proposed description strategies for harvesting and search (10 minutes)
• Introduction of participants (10 minutes)
• ISO Profile metadata (10 minutes)
• Use of ISO metadata for service quality and conformance (10 minutes)
• Open discussion on content and accessibility of discovery metadata (10 minutes)
• Workplan development (20 minutes)
– Task milestones and relation to AIP-2 Master Schedule
– Gaps between present practice and AIP discovery use case requirements: discernment and resolution
– Impacts and dependencies for work in this thread.
– Potential changes to GEOSS Architecture as a result of this work
• Report from Data Product Access session on metadata for deep content access and service binding. (5 minutes)
Without metadata, SOA itself would be impossible
DatasetsDatasetsService
InstancesService
Instances
Community Catalogs
Community Catalogs
Provisions
ClearinghouseClearinghouse Harvests / Cascades
Service / Dataset Description Metadata
Get
Capabilities ?
?
?
Service InstancesService
Instances
DatasetsDatasets
Community Catalogs
Community Catalogs
GEO Web Site
Client Tier
Business Process Tier
Access Tier
GEOWeb
Portal
GEOSSRegistries
Services
Components
Standards
GEONETCast OtherServices
ProductAccess
Services
ModelAccess
Services
CommunityPortals
Client Applications
RequirementsCommunityCatalogues
PortrayalServers
WorkflowManagement
ProcessingServers
OtherServices
GEOSSClearinghouse
SensorWeb
Services
Alerts/FeedsServers
InfrastructureRegistries
IOC Architecture – (Service) Types
GEOWeb
Portal(s)
Resource Discovery Questions
• Datasets– Data type / feature type– Observable(s)– Coverage in space and
time– Origin / authority– Quality / usage
• Services– Service type– Accessed content / data– Functionality /
operations / options– Bindings– Quality
• Catalogs• Record types• Holdings / collections• Supported interfaces• Queryable properties• Response types / formats• Tags / categories /
relations• Portals / applications
• Functionality• Client interfaces• Supported workflow• Intended users• Technology platform
Resource Description Relationships
Dataset DescriptionService Description
Collection Description
Product Description
Catalog Description
Application Description
Workflow Description
ProvisionOperatio
n
ProvisionOperatio
n
Operates on Provided by
Derivative Description
Discussion Topics
• What is scope of this topic?
– Architectural segmentation – no
– Common metadata elements and mechanisms - yes
• Essential description elements come not from mandatory minimums but from essential questions
– Search questions
– Evaluation (understanding) questions
– Selection questions
– Binding questions
• ISO 19115
– Rich source of elements for describing and documenting diverse resources
– Requires profiling and best practice to be useful for GEOSS
– There are extension elements in 19115, but element use has to be schema-compliant
Discussion Topics, 2
• ISO Profile: what is it and what is a profile?
– Profile of ISO 19115 and 19119 (19139 XML encoding) to describe coupled dataset and service identification
– Application profile of OGC CS/W which defines record types for the above metadata elements
– (Pending) Mapping of metadata elements to/from ebRIM registry objects
• Leaf catalog problem – what to do with unregistered community catalog content?
– Should descriptions distinguish between registered and unregistered?
– How many mappings are needed / desired
• Global identities for describing & maintaining resource relationships
– Identity mechanism
– What entities need to be distinguished (e.g. datatype, data product, data representation, service instance, observable, unit)?
Discussion Topics, 3
• How to define and test conformance?– Schema conformance– Link conformance– Conformance to reality
• Metalevels– Data vs data collections vs data aggregates/
synopses– Same levels in metadata (and maybe more levels)
• Versioning and persistence– 4D / 5D extent description
Workplan Elements for Metadata Thread
• Interact with Scenario Groups to define critical searches “the catalog questions” and resource types
• Refine of federated resource discovery use cases• Define common description metadata profiles and
formats• Agree, support, register metadata exchange
mechanisms• Agree community catalog collection records to
support discretionary federated queries
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Catalogue and Clearinghouse (2C)Session Overview
Josh Lieberman
Doug Nebert
Kengo Aizawa
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Session Agenda• Introduction to GEOSS Clearinghouse environment (Josh Lieberman, 10 min)• Status of GEOSS Clearinghouse deployments (ESA, Compusult, ESRI, USGS,
5 min each):– Capabilities for metadata harvest and query distribution - supported
metadata formats, structures, interfaces– Strategy and requirements for registered catalogues in GEOSS Svc Reg– Commonality and distinctiveness among deployments
• Brief status from community catalogue operators (5-10 minutes each) on:– Focus of catalogue (audience, # recs, geo extent)– Registration status with GEOSS Service Registry– Service protocol used– Metadata structure(s) used – Collection representations– Issues: findability, accessibility, interoperability, currency
• Next Steps discussion - What goals and activities on the Clearinghouse and catalogues for AIP-II? (10min)
Discussion Topics, 1
• Distributed query vs harvest – community catalogs would like to receive usage stats from Clearinghouse cache (ROI measurements and feedback)
• Disambiguation – duplication – different metadata for the same data may be useful, but would like to remove duplicated metadata
• General issue of collecting and acting on user feedback• Is Clearinghouse success the discovery of or the access to
content?• Interoperability – what is the measure of interchange between
clearinghouse instances and discovery clients?
Session Issues, 2
• More interaction in distributed searches – needs harvested collection metadata from distributed catalogs from which to draw hints
• Architecture issues– GEOSS architecture is not segmented by SBA– Resources are contributed by or pertain to communities
which in turn can be categorized by one or more SBA’s.– Communities are overlapping and there is no orthogonal
layer or hierarchy of community catalogs which represent all services. Architecture therefore cannot itself solve recursion and ambiguity problems in harvesting and distributed search
• To what extent should the clearinghouses go beyond discovery (to evaluation, selection, binding)?
Workplan Elements for Catalogue / Clearinghouse WG
• Persistence, completeness, findability
• More resources and resource types, e.g. applications, workflows
• Minimum interoperability measures, e.g. geoss:Record
• Best practices for federated harvest and query• User requirements refinement and added registry / clearinghouse
value • Controlled vocabularies, mediation resources, cross-community
enablement
• On-going role for search and discovery in scenarios and decision support applications
• Facilitation of usable OpenSearch / GeoSearch entry points to the Clearinghouse
• Role for publish-subscribe-notify interaction style in Clearinghouse
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Data Products Access Session Overview
Hans-Peter Plag, UNR
Glenn Rutledge, NOAA NOMADS
Hervé Caumont, OGC IP Team / ERDAS
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Data Product Access responses
• 23 Primary responses: CIESIN, CNES, EPA, ESA, GEO-Ukraine, ICAN, ICT4EO, IP3, ISPRA, JAXA, Mines Paris Tech, NASA World Wind, NOAA IOOS, NOAA NCDC GOSIC, NOAA NCDC NEXRAD, NOAA NCDC NIDIS, NOAA NCDC NOMADS, NOAA/NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS, Northrop Grumman, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS, Spot Image, USGS, Washington Univ St. Louis
• 15 Contributing responses: ACRF, Caribbean Flood Team, ERDAS, ESIP AQ Cluster, ESRI, ESRI Canada, NOAA SNAAP
Session Agenda
• Introduction: once the client has discovered a service......”how to ensure (strong word but) the client application can bind to that service, i.e use service metadata, and then use data through integration in a local data model”
• Presentations by primary participants: – ICAN– CIESIN– GALEON
Participation
• ~ 34 participants, mainly representatives of data providers from governmental agencies, data centers, universities, private companies, also providers of infrastructure for data providers and distribution, such as GEONETCast;
• from a number of countries and disciplines;
• very little end-user representation, if any.
• Most time was spend on presentations.
Analysis of common themes from presentations
• Common features:– Although all services have a web interface for
access, there is a wide range of approaches, complexity, data models and concepts.
– Although most presentations emphasized a user link, it was not clear who these users are.
– Most services seemed to have a limited set of data formats and projections with little options for users to request what they need.
• We recommend providing more descriptions (Capabilities…)
– Promotion of the services does not seem to be a key focus.
Conclusions
• There are to many different standards that users have to know in order to access data.
• Too much workload is put on the user (example re-analysis data versus web page: a user of reanalysis data needs to learn the variety of formats, while a web user doesn't have to care about what language was used to encode the web page, the browser does this for the user.)?
• We need to focus more on this aspect of reducing the workload for the user.
• Guiding principle: Determine what few things need to be the same so that everything else can remain different !!!
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Sensors and Models AccessSession Overview
Anwar Vahed, ICT4EO
Luis Bermudez, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS
Don Sullivan Caribbean Flood Team
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Sensors and Models Access:service, schema, encoding• Scenarios
– Disaster response for Floods and Fire
• Sensors and Models– Sensors: EO-1, TRMM, Envisat, MODIS,...– Models: WRF and CALPUFF, Bluesky,...
• Technologies– Sensor Web Enablement (SOS, SAS, SPS,...)– Model output in WCS / WMS / SOS
Agenda • Co-lead introduces the session (2 minutes)◦ Goal: discuss major issues and prioritize• Self introductions of persons in the session (5 minutes)• Presentations by several primary participants (20 minutes)• Briefly describe your end-to-end scenario (what we have now)• Mayor problems• Recommend next steps
•GEO-Ukraine (5 min)•VIEWS (5 min)•ICT4EO (5 min)•Northrop (5 min)
• Open Discussion (60 minutes)• Priorities for next steps• Milestones
Issues
• SOS / XML records are too large– improve 52North, look at: compression, WCS,
CSML, BinaryXML.
• No timely access of satellite imagery for disaster response
– revise UN charter call methods
• No minimum/uniform description metadata for models that allow model-model model-observation comparisons.
– explore other activities (ESML,CMAS,..)
Issues• No uniform coding and naming conventions for
model metadata values– Need semantic mediation and conventions– GO-ESSP (Glenn Rutledge)
• No standard sub-setting of model output• Specifications too loose for encoding data in XML
– look for or produce guidance
• Need FUNDING for underserved areas for instruments to improve ops and cal/val
• Need Intergovernmental/interagency communication/agreements/harmonization of objectives
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
WorkflowSession Report
Liping Di
Satoshi Sekiguchi
Greg Yetman
GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff
25-26 September 2008
Session Agenda
• Co-lead introduces the session (5 minutes)• Self introductions of persons in the session (10 min)• Presentations by several primary participants (30 min)
– GeoBrain (Liping Di)– GeoGRID (Satoshi Sekiguchi)– Population WPS (Greg Yetman)– Workflow for Floods (Nataliia Kussul)– Service Orchestration (Jolyon Martin)
• Open Discussion (10 min)• Establish matrix of service providers and services• Develop a work plan for the topic: dates and actions
SBA Scenarios & Workflow (revised)
Air Quality
Renewable Energy
Disaster Response
Biodiversity andClimate
Service-chaining,Workflows
Approach
• Register early, register often!• Inventory available services• Mix & match existing services with scenario
requirements: identify gaps• Use workflow engines as appropriate for chaining• Coordinate activities with cross-cutting technology
groups; ensure that solutions fit within the architecture and support the SBAs– any shortcomings identified should be brought to
the attention of the appropriate architects
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Client Applications SessionsSessions Report
Session Points of Contact:
Nadine Alameh, MobileAps
Hervé Caumont, OGC IP Team / ERDAS
September 26th, 2008
Client Applications
• 5 Primary responses: Compusult, ESRI, ESA; CNES, ERDAS, NASA World Wind
• 19 Contributing responses: BKG, Caribbean Flood Team, CIESIN, ESIP AQ Cluster, Mines Paris Tech, GEO-Ukraine, ICAN, ICT4EO, IP3, ISPRA, NOAA NCDC GOSIC, NOAA NCDC NEXRAD, NOAA NCDC NIDIS, NOAA SNAAP, NOAA/NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS, Northrop Grumman, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS, USGS, Washington Univ St. Louis
Session Agenda (1)
• CA Offerings: Many community portals are emerging to serve various community practices. How do these applications connect to GEOSS? How can they leverage the Common Infrastructure and how can they best contribute their offerings into this global system without having to reinvent the wheel with each community or application.
• Presentations by primary participants:– GEO portals: ESRI, ESA, Compusult– Communities: NOAA GOSIC, NOAA GeoNETCast,
Washington Univ. – Reusable components : NASA WorldWind and ERDAS TITAN
Network
Session Agenda (2)
• CA Collaborations: what are the possible collaboration scenarios in order to achieve cross-domain, value-added applications within GEOSS ?
• Presentations by primary participants:– Mines Paris Tech SoDA
Open discussion
• GEO Portal Requirements• Is GEO branded and
persistent for GEOSS• Support web presence for all 9
SBAs• Assurance of connect to CH• Request for content to fuel
SBA outcomes and visibility
• Community Portals definition
• Access to value-added products
• Search some catalogs
• Issue with discovery of community portals within GEOSS
• Needs api to clearinghouse content
• Commonalities
• Both are GEO Registered
• Provides a user interface to Web resources
• Need workflow support (user interface for discover and chain)
• May provide reusable assets for discovery, viewing, etc (portlets, …)
Outcomes• Define the AIP-2 work plan in order to first
– Augment the GCI• Refine asap the taxonomies useful for registering• Simplify the user interface
– Foster System to System interoperations• Web Portals <> Service Providers (at least provide WFS/WCS
client applications for downloads, plus Map view when portrayal service on same data is provided)
• Among Web Portals (content sharing)– Page links, Feeds, … manage URLs, publish feeds or mail
alerts for news on content updates…• Web Portals <> users :
– Collaborative spaces to support Communities of practice, or help create cross-domain CoP
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Test Facility for Service RegistrationSession Overview
Jolyon Martin, ESA
Doug Nebert, USGS
GEO AIP-2 Kickoff
September 25th, 2008
Test Facility for Service Registration
• Primary Participants: – BKG: ISO Profile conformance test– ESA: Persistent Testbed resources– USGS: FGDC service checker
• 11 participants in the session• Topics:
– Conformance test– Persistent testbed– Operations testing
• Results: – Testing resources identified– Missing resources identified
• Action: Register the URLs of the test interfaces• Action: Create a proxy view for service testing
endpoint
• Way Forward– Support to scenarios
Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008
Start Time Topic Speaker
1330 Reports from sessions (10 min *10)
Session leaders
1430 Break (15 min)
1445 Reports from sessions, continued Session leaders
1525 Task Planning: communications, schedule, web presences
George Percivall
1555 General Discussion All
1700 Closing
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Task Planning: Working Groups, Communications, schedule, web presences
Jolyon Martin, ESA
Doug Nebert, USGS
GEO AIP-2 Kickoff
September 25th, 2008
Project Planning topics
• Working Groups• Communications Plan• Anticipating additional participants• Milestones and schedule
AIP-2 Working Groups (WGs)
• SBA, Communities of Practice, Scenario Sessions– Disaster Response– Climate Change and Biodiversity– Renewable Energy– Air Quality and Health
• Transverse Technology sessions:– Clearinghouse, Catalogues, Registries and Metadata– Access Services: products, sensors, models– Workflow and Alerts– Portals and Application Clients– Test Facility
Communication Plan
• Telecons– AIP Plenary Telecon – Tuesdays
• Alternating topics: SBAs and Trans Tech• Beginning 30 September – next Tuesday
– WG telecons as defined by WG leaders• E-mail list-servers
– One plenary list– One list per work group – Hosted by OGC; will send directions on how to
register• GEO ftp site – may be available for our use?• Collaborative Workspaces
Cross-linking, Communication:Collaboration Environment for AIP Pilot
2008-07-07 R.Husar ([email protected])
WG Summary, Uniform look for WGsDrupal basedMore stable Links to Detail workspace
Workspace for Specific WGsWiki StyleMore DynamicESIP or Google Groups
Collaboration Elements• Mailing Lists
– Plenary– Working group
• OGCNetwork pages– Group logistics– Compiled / organized work results– Managed by WG leads
• Google Groups– Participant-created pages / page content– Documents uploaded and attached to pages– Discussion forums (?)– Participant-organized
OGC Network Example
Wiki Example
Google Groups Example
Anticipating additional participants
• European Commission: DANTE• GEONETCast• GEOGrid
Comments
• What is the relationship between SBA and Transverse Technology work groups?– SBAs identify needs satisfied by Transverse WGs– Transverse groups need to formulate questions to
SBA• How do you cross-grain the SBA scenarios
– Transverse Technology groups
DevelopmentDevelopmentActivitiesActivities
Kick-offKick-offWorkshopWorkshop
Call for Call for ParticipationParticipation
ConceptConceptDevelopmentDevelopment
PersistentPersistentOperationsOperations(AR-07-01)(AR-07-01)
Participation
Participation
Participation
Participation
ParticipationArchitectureArchitecture
DocumentationDocumentation
Updates for each step
Baseline
AR-07-02 Architecture Implementation PilotEvolutionary Development Process
Operational Baseline and Lessons Learned for next evolutionary spiral
Continuous interaction with external activities
AI Pilot Development Approach
AIP-2 Schedule – Development Phase
Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008
Start Time Topic Speaker
1330 Reports from sessions (10 min *10)
Session leaders
1430 Break (15 min)
1445 Reports from sessions, continued Session leaders
1525 Task Planning: communications, schedule, web presences
George Percivall
1555 General Discussion All
1700 Closing