Difference between revisions of "Commission 6-8 “use cases” for key Air Quality Data Procesing/Analysis Value Chains"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{CandidateAQFocusArea | {{CandidateAQFocusArea | ||
| − | |Title= | + | |Title=key Air Quality Data Procesing/Analysis Value Chains |
|Discussion=Two use cases were discussed during the meeting as an experiment to see if working through the “data value chain” at a “moderate” level of detail could help identify/clarify gaps/opportunities for collaboration and investment. The exercise was rushed, and did not include participation from “real users” but produced significant discussion and helped identify/validate many of the candidate topics identified in this list, including this proposal (#10). The proposal is for a more formal commissioning of 6-8 of these cases, done right, with 2-3 being done by January | |Discussion=Two use cases were discussed during the meeting as an experiment to see if working through the “data value chain” at a “moderate” level of detail could help identify/clarify gaps/opportunities for collaboration and investment. The exercise was rushed, and did not include participation from “real users” but produced significant discussion and helped identify/validate many of the candidate topics identified in this list, including this proposal (#10). The proposal is for a more formal commissioning of 6-8 of these cases, done right, with 2-3 being done by January | ||
|CandidateProduct=Activity would produce two kinds of products: | |CandidateProduct=Activity would produce two kinds of products: | ||
# Process of conducting the use case explorations and documentation would produce new shared understanding among the focus/customer groups used, and the workgroup itself in overseeing and assimilating the results---this could help greatly in the task of refining what we meant by “AQ information infrastructure” | # Process of conducting the use case explorations and documentation would produce new shared understanding among the focus/customer groups used, and the workgroup itself in overseeing and assimilating the results---this could help greatly in the task of refining what we meant by “AQ information infrastructure” | ||
# Hard products would be one or more reports on the 6-8 use cases, conducted in sufficient detail to identify both general and specific opportunities/investment areas—ideally these would include specific data, data services or applications that could be commissioned immediately. These cases could validate/inform many of the other focus areas identified here. | # Hard products would be one or more reports on the 6-8 use cases, conducted in sufficient detail to identify both general and specific opportunities/investment areas—ideally these would include specific data, data services or applications that could be commissioned immediately. These cases could validate/inform many of the other focus areas identified here. | ||
| − | |NearTermAction=* Commission 2-3 use cases to be completed before January. Candidate use cases include: HTAP, NO2, and AQ forecasting. AQ Workgroup members are asked to provide suggestions to L Friedl for suggestions on use cases and available expertise to conduct these cases. | + | |NearTermAction=<br> |
| + | * Commission 2-3 use cases to be completed before January. Candidate use cases include: HTAP, NO2, and AQ forecasting. AQ Workgroup members are asked to provide suggestions to L Friedl for suggestions on use cases and available expertise to conduct these cases. | ||
** Note these cases would likely re-identify/refine nearly every item on this WG list. | ** Note these cases would likely re-identify/refine nearly every item on this WG list. | ||
|AQFocusArea=Planning/Communication | |AQFocusArea=Planning/Communication | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | == Possible Uses cases == | ||
| + | Possible use cases (presented at the [http://www.grss-ieee.org/menu.taf?menu=geoss&detail=GEOSSWorkshops&conferenceid=39&pageid=24 User and the GeoSS Architecture V - Denver 2006] | ||
| + | |||
| + | [http://www.grss-ieee.org/menu.taf?menu=geoss&detail=GEOSSWorkshops&conferenceid=39&pageid=24 Presentations] | ||
| + | |||
| + | http://datafedwiki.wustl.edu/index.php/2006-07-30_IGARSS06_Denver#Presentations | ||
| + | ==== HTAP Analysis/Processing Value Chain ==== | ||
| + | ==== Exceptional Event Analysis/Processing Value Chain ==== | ||
| + | ==== AQ Forecasting Analysis/Processing Value Chain ==== | ||
Latest revision as of 11:42, August 21, 2009
<Candidate Focus Areas for ESIP AQ WG | Edit with Form
key Air Quality Data Procesing/Analysis Value Chains
Discussion: Two use cases were discussed during the meeting as an experiment to see if working through the “data value chain” at a “moderate” level of detail could help identify/clarify gaps/opportunities for collaboration and investment. The exercise was rushed, and did not include participation from “real users” but produced significant discussion and helped identify/validate many of the candidate topics identified in this list, including this proposal (#10). The proposal is for a more formal commissioning of 6-8 of these cases, done right, with 2-3 being done by January
Candidate Product: Activity would produce two kinds of products:
- Process of conducting the use case explorations and documentation would produce new shared understanding among the focus/customer groups used, and the workgroup itself in overseeing and assimilating the results---this could help greatly in the task of refining what we meant by “AQ information infrastructure”
- Hard products would be one or more reports on the 6-8 use cases, conducted in sufficient detail to identify both general and specific opportunities/investment areas—ideally these would include specific data, data services or applications that could be commissioned immediately. These cases could validate/inform many of the other focus areas identified here.
Near-Term Action/Product:
- Commission 2-3 use cases to be completed before January. Candidate use cases include: HTAP, NO2, and AQ forecasting. AQ Workgroup members are asked to provide suggestions to L Friedl for suggestions on use cases and available expertise to conduct these cases.
- Note these cases would likely re-identify/refine nearly every item on this WG list.
- Note these cases would likely re-identify/refine nearly every item on this WG list.
Type of Candidate AQ Focus Area: Planning/Communication
Possible Uses cases
Possible use cases (presented at the User and the GeoSS Architecture V - Denver 2006
http://datafedwiki.wustl.edu/index.php/2006-07-30_IGARSS06_Denver#Presentations
