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

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


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


• 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


• 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


• 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


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


Energy SBA Session Report

Ellsworth LeDrew, University of Waterloo, Canada

Thierry Ranchin, Mines ParisTech, France

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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


Air Quality and Health Scenario

Stefan Falke, Rudy Husar, Frank Lindsay, David McCabe

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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

http://www.ogcnetwork.net/node/407


Service and Dataset Description (1C)Session Overview

Josh Lieberman

Doug Nebert

Ted Haberman

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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)?


• 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


Catalogue and Clearinghouse (2C)Session Overview

Josh Lieberman

Doug Nebert

Kengo Aizawa

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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)


• 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


Data Products Access Session Overview

Hans-Peter Plag, UNR

Glenn Rutledge, NOAA NOMADS

Hervé Caumont, OGC IP Team / ERDAS

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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 !!!


Sensors and Models AccessSession Overview

Anwar Vahed, ICT4EO

Luis Bermudez, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS

Don Sullivan Caribbean Flood Team

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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


WorkflowSession Report

Liping Di

Satoshi Sekiguchi

Greg Yetman

GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff


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


Client Applications SessionsSessions Report

Session Points of Contact:

Nadine Alameh, MobileAps

Hervé Caumont, OGC IP Team / ERDAS


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


Test Facility for Service RegistrationSession Overview

Jolyon Martin, ESA

Doug Nebert, USGS

GEO AIP-2 Kickoff


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




Session leaders

1430 Break (15 min)



George Percivall


1700 Closing


Task Planning: Working Groups, Communications, schedule, web presences

Jolyon Martin, ESA

Doug Nebert, USGS

GEO AIP-2 Kickoff


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




Session leaders

1430 Break (15 min)



George Percivall


1700 Closing

geo task ar-07-02 aip-2 kickoff workshop closing plenary

Documents

geoss architectureusing

clearinghouse service

service registrationaip

kickoff sessionssba

geo aipiiken mcdonald

geo web portal

geo task ar

web services workflowsyprof