Update on OGC involvement in GEOSS by pengxiang


									GEO Task AR-07-02

AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop
Closing Plenary

NCAR Mesa Laboratory
25-26 September 2008
Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008
Start Time   Topic                              Speaker

1330         Reports from sessions              Session leaders
             (10 min *10)
1430         Break (15 min)
1445         Reports from sessions, continued   Session leaders

1525         Task Planning: communications,     George Percivall
             schedule, web presences
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
  – 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
• …using a GEO Web Portal and a GEOSS
  Clearinghouse search facility
• …to access services through GEOSS
  Interoperability Arrangements
• …support GEOSS Societal Benefit Areas
                                          Slide 7
Pilot Kickoff Objectives
• Begin the Execution Phase of the Pilot
• Refine and develop
  – Collaboration and interoperability goals
  – Detailed design based on CFP
  – User scenarios suitable for demonstration.
• Develop detailed plan and schedule for
  the Execution Phase
Why participate in GEOSS AIP?
• Better awareness of community interoperability
• Better understanding and use of proposed GEOSS
• Standardization of intra- and inter-system data
• Leveraging and reuse of existing resources through
• Increased value of existing development investments
• Improved resource availability and decision-making
  for end users
              Slide originally from Shawn McClureCIRA, Colorado State University
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 Response
Session 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 & Presenters
Presented    Participant                       Title
at Kickoff
Y            Morris Brill, Michele Mayorga     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     NOAA IOOS Data Integration Framework (DIF) Contribution to the
             IOOS)                             GEO AIP-II
             Ken McDonald (NOAA) and Dr.       NOAA-NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS joint efforts for persistent
             Liping Di (GMU)                   GOES data services, weather scenarios, Web… services/ workflows
Y            Prof. Natalia Kussul, SRI NASU-   Sensor Web for Flood Applications
             NSAU (GEO-Ukraine)
Y            Satoko H. MIURA and Kengo         Catalog Server for ALOS data
             AIZAWA (JAXA)
Y            Steve Del Greco (NCDC)            The Next Generation Weather Radar system
             SURA/SCOOP, GoMOOS, and           Communication of Disasters and Mitigation of Post-Disaster Damage
             ICAN (Oregan State U.)            International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN)
Y            (CNES) CENTRE NATIONAL            Disaster Charter Catalog Server for GML-EO Metadata Harvesting and
             D’ETUDES SPATIALES                HMA-compliant Web Services Access
Y            (ERDAS) The Earth to Business     Geospatial Collaboration and Information Sharing Infrastructure for
             Company                           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
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 Biodiversity
Session 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 context
   Global 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 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
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

    NOAA GOSIC                                                   ACRF access services
                                      IP3 ENM server

  NOAA NEXRAD                                                             ACRF CMBE

                                               IP3 Clearinghouse/   USGS services
  NOAA NIDIS                 TOPS
                                                                          USGS Maps

                                                   GBIF resources
Inter.         Inter.
Arrangement    Standard

 GEOSS Registries                                      GEO-Portals &
                                               Clearinghouse Catalogs
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
     • 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 ?

Task                                               Deadline
To send comments and contributions on use          20 Oct
To look at possible scenarios already defined in   20 Nov
other international projects/programmes
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
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

• 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
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
• Help form the Workflow Team

• Enterprise modeling that will lead to the workflow

• 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
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 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
 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, 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
Workspace is live on OGC network:

Telecons will be set up shortly

AQ SBA will work with transverse tech WGs to clarify
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
•   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

                      Harvests /            Community Catalogs
Clearinghouse                                Community Catalogs


                  Service / Dataset
                 Description Metadata


    Instances                                    Datasets
                      Provisions                  Datasets
IOC Architecture – (Service) Types
                                                                  Client Tier
   GEO Web                         Community               Client
     Site                           Portals              Applications

                                                   Business Process Tier
  Registries       GEOSS
 Components     Clearinghouse   Alerts/Feeds      Portrayal      Workflow
                                  Servers         Servers       Management
                Community       Infrastructure   Processing        Other
 Requirements   Catalogues        Registries      Servers         Services

                                                                Access Tier
                    Product          Sensor        Model
 GEONETCast                                                       Other
                    Access            Web         Access
                    Services        Services      Services
Resource Discovery Questions
• Datasets                        • Catalogs
   – Data type / feature type        • Record types
   – Observable(s)                   • Holdings / collections
   – Coverage in space and           • Supported interfaces
     time                            • Queryable properties
   – Origin / authority              • Response types / formats
   – Quality / usage                 • Tags / categories /
• Services                              relations
   – Service type                 • Portals / applications
   – Accessed content / data         • Functionality
   – Functionality / operations      • Client interfaces
     / options                       • Supported workflow
   – Bindings                        • Intended users
   – Quality                         • Technology platform
Resource Description Relationships
                           Operates on          Provided by
    Service Description                                           Dataset Description

                Catalog Description               Collection Description

       Application Description                          Product Description

 Workflow Description                                         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
      – Requires profiling and best practice to be useful for GEOSS
      – There are extension elements in 19115, but element use has to be
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
•   Leaf catalog problem – what to do with unregistered community catalog
     – Should descriptions distinguish between registered and
     – 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/
   – 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
• Agree, support, register metadata exchange
• 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
• General issue of collecting and acting on user feedback
• Is Clearinghouse success the discovery of or the access to
• 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
• 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
•   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
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,
  Mines Paris Tech, NASA World Wind, NOAA IOOS,
  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
• ~ 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
   – Promotion of the services does not seem to be a
     key focus.
• 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 Access
Session Overview

Anwar Vahed, ICT4EO
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
  • 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
     • 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
• 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,..)
• 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
   – 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
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop

Session 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
   – 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)

                    Biodiversity and

     Air Quality                       Disaster Response

                   Renewable Energy
• 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 Sessions
Sessions 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,
  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
Session Agenda (2)
• CA Collaborations: what are the possible collaboration scenarios
  in order to achieve cross-domain, value-added applications within

• Presentations by primary participants:
   – Mines Paris Tech SoDA
    Open discussion
• GEO Portal Requirements                 •   Community Portals definition
• Is GEO branded and                      •   Access to value-added products
  persistent for GEOSS                    •   Search some catalogs
• Support web presence for all 9
  SBAs                                    •   Issue with discovery of community
                                              portals within GEOSS
• Assurance of connect to CH
• Request for content to fuel             •   Needs api to clearinghouse
  SBA outcomes and visibility                 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, …)
•   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 Registration
Session 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

•   Way Forward
     – Support to scenarios
Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008
Start Time   Topic                              Speaker

1330         Reports from sessions              Session leaders
             (10 min *10)
1430         Break (15 min)
1445         Reports from sessions, continued   Session leaders

1525         Task Planning: communications,     George Percivall
             schedule, web presences
1555         General Discussion                 All

1700         Closing
AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop

Task Planning: Working Groups,
Communications, schedule, web

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
• GEO ftp site – may be available for our use?
• Collaborative Workspaces
Cross-linking, Communication:
Collaboration Environment for AIP Pilot

WG Summary,
Uniform look for WGs
Drupal based
More stable
Links to Detail workspace

                            Workspace for Specific WGs
                            Wiki Style
                            More Dynamic
                            ESIP or Google Groups
2008-07-07 R.Husar
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
• GEOGrid
• 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
• How do you cross-grain the SBA scenarios
   – Transverse Technology groups
AI Pilot Development Approach
                           AR-07-02 Architecture Implementation Pilot
                              Evolutionary Development Process
Development          Participation

                                                                      Continuous interaction
                      Call for                                        with external activities
                    Participation       Participation

  Updates for each step                 Workshop             Participation

      Architecture                                        Development                  Participation

         Baseline                                                                    Persistent
  Operational Baseline and Lessons Learned for next evolutionary spiral
AIP-2 Schedule – Development Phase

AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop                       25-26 September 2008

Key design decisions complete:                     November 2008
 Some posted in Best Practice Wiki
Scenario storyboards developed                     December 2008

Service registration Complete                        January 2009

Scenario Testing complete; Screen captures          February 2009

Operational baseline defined                           March 2009

AIP-2 results transition to operations          1st quarter of 2009
Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008
Start Time   Topic                              Speaker

1330         Reports from sessions              Session leaders
             (10 min *10)
1430         Break (15 min)
1445         Reports from sessions, continued   Session leaders

1525         Task Planning: communications,     George Percivall
             schedule, web presences
1555         General Discussion                 All

1700         Closing

To top