Discovery Telecon 2011-03-08
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
<< Back to the Discovery Telecons page
- Tuesday, March 8, 2011. 4:00pm ET / 1:00pm PT
- Phone number: 1-866-509-1626
- Meeting Code: 3851033#
DCP-1 review
- Review final changes to DCP-1: ESIP Discovery Cast Atom Response Format v1.1
- Answer some questions posted on the DCP-1 Discussions.
- Is a rectangular bbox in the response always required? Even if the 'natural' bounds are a circle or polygon?
- Should add note that if there are geospatial information in the response item, then should always have a box. Could add other shapes.
- James G: better to remove optional circle shape to increase interoperability. more options is bad thing. Circle doesn't bring more benefits.
- Chris: want to be simple as possible while as general as possible.
- namespaces to use georss.
- rel links and IANA.
- Predefined IANA namespaces do not need a namespace.
- Brian is concerned with needing more information for machine parsable rel types.
- We should play nice with the OGC types as well.
- Brian advocates for supporting both rel "data" and "enclosure" (IANA) types.
- Atom uses rel and alternate type links.
- To keep things simple, we decided to remove mapping to IANA for now. Stick with original rel link types: data, browse, documentation, metadata, collection, service, event, feed.
- Feeds of feeds allows for hierarchy. Though there are real use case for it, we'll keep it in for now.
- This is a 'baseline' specification of the OpenSearch response. Would need specifics for granule, collection, and service responses.
- Should we specify that all discovery services must support the full GeoRSS-Simple spec? Note the support of box, circle, and polygon types. But radius, line, and point are not in yet.
- Is a rectangular bbox in the response always required? Even if the 'natural' bounds are a circle or polygon?
Decide on Voting Method
- What are we voting for?
- From last month's minutes, "Also done via Discussion pages, with thread named "Voting"; people can leave their signatures with Yea or Nay".
- James G: GDAL has a group of 5 or so people on the board. Any one of them can veto. But the intent is that they generally won't.
- Chris: 3/5 majority of Yays to Nays, and the editors can veto.
- Anonymous voting?
- Most agreed that better not to do it anonymously.
- Where to vote?
- esipfed.org wiki, new Drupal-based ESIP Federation website, Doodle, etc.?
- Settled on using Doodle and then copy/paste the final results into the wiki when done.
Next DCP ideas
- Due to time constraints, decided to handle this offline on the mailing list.
- Specific extensions to Discovery Atom Response format for Granule-level, Collection-level, and Service responses. Simply builds upon DCP-1.
- Discovery RSS Response Format?
- OpenSearch Request Format. adopt OGC OpenSearch spec?
- ServiceCasting Request Format?
- DataCasting Request Format?
- Mashup conventions?
ESIP Summer Discovery Session planning
- Next meeting in July, so not many telecons left. The theme is Information Quality.
- Two things could do:
- Technical workshops
- Educational outreach. demo various implementations.
- Would have to request time at ESIP first.
- First, do we want something relevant to the Information Quality theme?
- James G: may be better off to stick with out main message on Discover service capabilities. more working meeting.
- second by Jeff.
- James G: may be better off to stick with out main message on Discover service capabilities. more working meeting.
- Curt and Hook agreed about need for outreach.
- Talk to Carol about outreach.
Attendees
- J. McWhirter
- M. Cechini
- C. Lynnes
- C. Tilmes
- W. Sonntag
- H. Hua
- B. Wilson
- J. Gallagher
