1 / 93

GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Closing Plenary

GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Closing Plenary. NCAR Mesa Laboratory 25-26 September 2008. Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008. Agenda – 25 September. Agenda – 26 September. Thank you!. NCAR hosting of the Kickoff Richard Anthes, Peter Backlund, Carol Park, Donna Bonnetti

zofia
Download Presentation

GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Closing Plenary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopClosing Plenary NCAR Mesa Laboratory 25-26 September 2008

  2. Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008

  3. Agenda – 25 September

  4. Agenda – 26 September

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. GEO Task AR-07-02Architecture 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

  8. 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

  9. 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 Slide originally from Shawn McClureCIRA, Colorado State University

  10. 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

  11. AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopDisaster 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

  12. Session Primary Participants & Presenters

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopClimate Change and BiodiversitySession Summary S. Nativi (IP3 Team and CNR), Gary Geller (IP3 Team and NASA JPL) GEO AIP-2 Kickoff September 26th, 2008

  18. Agenda (Thursday, 25th 13:00 – 14:15) I part:  The context Global Federated Climate and Weather systemsD. 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 Principal NOAA NCDC Response Christina Lief USGS Response Doug Norbert BKG Response Juergen Walther III part: AIP-2 Interoperability experiments & shared use scenarios An interoperability test framework to share resources All Possible collaborative Use scenarios All Conclusions All

  19. 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

  20. Session Notes IS IS IS IS IS IS IS • Interoperability framework for common CC & Bio use scenarios IP3 Clearinghouse/ Mediator GEO-Portals &Clearinghouse Catalogs ACRF access services TOPS resources IA IA IA IP3 ENM server NOAA NEXRAD NOAA GOSIC NOAA NIDIS GEOSS Registries GBIF resources ACRF CMBE USGS Maps USGS services Inter. Arrangement Inter. Standard

  21. 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

  22. 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 ?

  23. Schedule

  24. AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopEnergy SBA Session Report Ellsworth LeDrew, University of Waterloo, Canada Thierry Ranchin, Mines ParisTech, France GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

  25. 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.

  26. ?

  27. What we have in hands

  28. 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

  29. Geographical Information • Hydrological information for US from NOAA • Worldwide Geographical information from USGS

  30. 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)

  31. What are the missing datasets ?

  32. 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

  33. In the Workflow domain, what do we need?

  34. 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

  35. 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

  36. AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopAir Quality and Health Scenario Stefan Falke, Rudy Husar, Frank Lindsay, David McCabe GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

  37. 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 episode qualifies as an ’exceptional event’ under AQ regulations Exceptional 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 tomorrow Enables 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

  38. Air Quality Session • What we want to do: SBA goals have been suggested by scenario Very 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, NorthropGrumman, 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)

  39. 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

  40. 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

  41. AIP-2 Kickoff WorkshopService and Dataset Description (1C)Session Overview Josh Lieberman Doug Nebert Ted Haberman GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008 Thursday 1300 - 1430

  42. 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)

  43. Without metadata, SOA itself would be impossible Community Catalogs Community Catalogs Clearinghouse Harvests / Cascades ? Service / Dataset Description Metadata ? Get Capabilities Service Instances Service Instances Datasets ? Datasets Provisions

  44. Community Portals Infrastructure Registries Alerts/Feeds Servers Other Services Processing Servers Workflow Management Portrayal Servers Community Catalogues IOC Architecture – (Service) Types Client Tier GEO Web Portal GEO Web Portal(s) GEO Web Site Client Applications Business Process Tier GEOSS Registries GEOSS Clearinghouse Components Services Standards Requirements Access Tier Product Access Services Sensor Web Services Model Access Services GEONETCast Other Services

  45. Resource Discovery Questions • 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 • 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

  46. Resource Description Relationships Operates on Provided by Dataset Description Service Description Provision Operation Collection Description Catalog Description Product Description Application Description Derivative Description Workflow Description

  47. 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

  48. 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)?

  49. 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

  50. 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

More Related