Difference between revisions of "P&S Data Quality"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
m |
m |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
==Discussion from March 28, 2006== | ==Discussion from March 28, 2006== | ||
− | + | ===What dimensions of quality should be considered?=== | |
− | + | :Quality control | |
− | + | ::Error bar | |
− | + | ::Contamination (weather, clouds) | |
− | :: | ||
::Instrument error | ::Instrument error | ||
::Cross instrument consistency | ::Cross instrument consistency | ||
::Subjective scaling (e.g. quality judgement with range 0-5) | ::Subjective scaling (e.g. quality judgement with range 0-5) | ||
+ | :Quality assurance (someone tags it as valid) | ||
* How can we enforce these standards within the Earth Information Exchange? | * How can we enforce these standards within the Earth Information Exchange? | ||
+ | * What common data quality standards can the Federation offer within the Earth Information Exchange? | ||
* What 3rd party ratings can we support? | * What 3rd party ratings can we support? | ||
* Are there similar ratings for "data services"? | * Are there similar ratings for "data services"? |
Revision as of 15:51, March 28, 2006
Back to: Products and Services
Discussion from March 28, 2006
What dimensions of quality should be considered?
- Quality control
- Error bar
- Contamination (weather, clouds)
- Instrument error
- Cross instrument consistency
- Subjective scaling (e.g. quality judgement with range 0-5)
- Quality assurance (someone tags it as valid)
- How can we enforce these standards within the Earth Information Exchange?
- What common data quality standards can the Federation offer within the Earth Information Exchange?
- What 3rd party ratings can we support?
- Are there similar ratings for "data services"?