Difference between revisions of "Community needs"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
(Created page with "Terminology/taxonomy *** Data Intercomparison and quality harmonization *** Best practices in different communities *** Fit-for-purpose criteria for data quality (e.g., climate...") |
m (Adding a navigation link) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | This is not only beefing up metadata and QC flags in the data. It might be even more important to establish a framework that assesses the quality of data products for different usages, e.g., climate change or local monitoring. This fitness-for-purpose product-level quality cannot be handled by QC flags but requires a community-based chaining data content with data delivery and web-based services. | |
| − | + | * Data Intercomparison and quality harmonization | |
| − | + | * Fit-for-purpose criteria for data quality (e.g., climate change need vs. near-real-time monitoring need) | |
| − | + | * Presenting data quality to users | |
| − | ** | + | |
| − | + | == Air Quality == | |
| − | + | ||
| − | * | + | * What does the air quality community need for data quality (i.e., for many different applications, many things people do - monitoring, detecting, EPA legalistic things, etc)? Is it more important to get data measurement down to 5th digit, or more important to get data within 3 hours, most important coverage (space and time), more important to have consistency throughout data, or precise accuracy and measurement for particular date? |
| − | + | * What are the methodologies used for data quality assessment throughout the communities? For example, people working with ground-based measurement data - surface means different things throughout different communities. Need to hear about the knowledge that already exists in the AQ community. | |
| − | + | ||
| + | == Precipitation == | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Aerosols == | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Sea Surface Temperature == | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Ocean Color == | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Land == | ||
| + | |||
| + | --- | ||
| + | |||
| + | Return to [[Information Quality]] | ||
Latest revision as of 22:51, September 15, 2012
This is not only beefing up metadata and QC flags in the data. It might be even more important to establish a framework that assesses the quality of data products for different usages, e.g., climate change or local monitoring. This fitness-for-purpose product-level quality cannot be handled by QC flags but requires a community-based chaining data content with data delivery and web-based services.
- Data Intercomparison and quality harmonization
- Fit-for-purpose criteria for data quality (e.g., climate change need vs. near-real-time monitoring need)
- Presenting data quality to users
Air Quality
- What does the air quality community need for data quality (i.e., for many different applications, many things people do - monitoring, detecting, EPA legalistic things, etc)? Is it more important to get data measurement down to 5th digit, or more important to get data within 3 hours, most important coverage (space and time), more important to have consistency throughout data, or precise accuracy and measurement for particular date?
- What are the methodologies used for data quality assessment throughout the communities? For example, people working with ground-based measurement data - surface means different things throughout different communities. Need to hear about the knowledge that already exists in the AQ community.
Precipitation
Aerosols
Sea Surface Temperature
Ocean Color
Land
---
Return to Information Quality
