Difference between revisions of "Discovery Telecon 2011-11-08"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
=== Debrief of EarthCube charette === | === Debrief of EarthCube charette === | ||
+ | * Multiple ESIP attendees | ||
+ | * Process was wide open to start, with capabilities defined | ||
+ | * A full-day spent on barriers to implementing EarthCube capabilities | ||
+ | * NSF did not discuss how it would like to leverage the things it already funds (NEON, GEON, DataONE, IRIS, etc.) | ||
+ | * Those with large NSF positions will likely be the ones granted the EAGER grants | ||
+ | * Significant amount of openness of collaboration | ||
+ | * ESIP got a lot of positive "play", from members rather than the core committees | ||
+ | * ESIP has been invited to participate on EAGER proposals | ||
+ | * Likely to see the large systems argue that EarthCube should be built off of their existing systems | ||
+ | * NSF likely to fund 5 or 6 EAGER grants | ||
+ | * Some groups planning on stringing proposals together | ||
+ | * Tim Killeen will be speaking at winter meeting, likely to leave NSF, no guarantee EarthCube will continue after Tim Killeen is gone | ||
+ | * Are the EAGER grants part of a "down-select" for future EarthCube proposals? | ||
+ | * Other programs outside of EarthCube will probably be used to support EarthCube | ||
+ | * Any feedback or actions for Discovery/ESC from the whitepaper submissions? | ||
+ | ** Next step is to try to get on with EAGER proposal teams | ||
+ | ** Alternatively, try to assemble a Discovery/ESC team that could be plugged into teams closer to NSF | ||
+ | * Is the outcome of the charrette available yet? | ||
+ | ** Does not look like the two-pagers are posted yet | ||
+ | ** The capabilities list is posted | ||
+ | * ESIP is trying to avoid competing with its members | ||
+ | ** The best thing for ESIP to do is to enable sharing/exchange of knowledge and technology towards a solution | ||
+ | ** ESIP will not be building something like EarthCube, rather bringing together members to build it | ||
+ | * The charrettes seemed to be mostly self-serving | ||
+ | |||
=== Status of Winter Session planning === | === Status of Winter Session planning === | ||
=== Next Steps for DCP-3 === | === Next Steps for DCP-3 === |
Revision as of 15:49, November 8, 2011
<< Back to the Discovery Telecons page
- Tuesday, November 8, 2011. 4:00pm ET / 1:00pm PT
- WebEx Info:
- Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada): 1-877-668-4493
- Attendee access code: 231 407 50
- To start the online portion of the Personal Conference meeting , go to https://esipfed.webex.com/mw0306ld/mywebex/default.do?siteurl=esipfed&service=1 and select the Discovery Cluster meeting.
Action Items
- Hook: Send out a Doodle poll to
Attendees
- Chris Lynnes
- Curt Tilmes
- Eric Rozell
- Hook Hua
- Carol Meyer
- Ken Keiser
- Christine White
- Jeff Mcwhirter
- Ruth Duerr
- Brian Wilson
Agenda
- GeoPortal presentation from Christine White
- Debrief of EarthCube charette
- Status of Winter Session planning
- Next Steps for DCP-3
Notes
GeoPortal presentation from Christine White
- Demo of other organizations that have implemented the Geoportal
- Is typically customized for each organizations
- Some Organizations
- Missouri
- NOAA (NCDC)
- EPA
- NOAA (Interagency Working Group)
- Lombardia
- Abu Dhabi (localization capabilities)
- Internat'l Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility
- geoportal.sourceforge.net (open source disribution of Geoportal)
- Apache license
- Out of the box functionality
- Roles: anonymous (search), publishers (contribute services), administrators (reviews publishers contributions)
- Getting "stuff" into the Geoportal
- Create metadata manually (out of the box, DC, ISO 19115, other customizable metadata editors)
- Upload metadata file
- Register resource on network (put a link to URL, ArcGIS, OAI, THREDDS, etc.)
- Can you add additional types, such as OpenSearch?
- OpenSearch falls under the URL Protocol Type
- Can you differentiate the URL Protocols, e.g., DataCasting, ServiceCasting protocols
- Would likely require changes to the back-end.
- What about THREDDS?
- Getting NCIC metadata from the OPeNDAP endpoint
- The Federated Search list allows the user to configure the sources
- You can also decide how often the Geoportal requests updates from service metadata
- You can only select up to five sources for federated search
- That is for performance reasons with the Geoportal interface
- Can you expose the query on Geoportal as OpenSearch?
- The purpose of DataCasting and ServiceCasting is to avoid registration
- What is the role of a Geoportal testbed for the Discovery cluster?
- DataCasting and ServiceCasting are seeking aggregators for there casts.
- Looking to "federate out" the capabilities with casting specs, not seeking a single registry
- Relies on aggregators to read the metadata, rather than filling out forms for metadata
- Christine sees the need for OpenSearch based on this aggregator idea
- Wrap-up for demo
- Can we set up another telecon for defining requirements of testbeds?
- The main point is, can OpenSearch casting specs fit in the Geoportal.
- Hook will set up a Doodle poll for Geoportal drill-down and requirements definition for testbed.
- We should revisit the RFP for the testbed in this meeting
Debrief of EarthCube charette
- Multiple ESIP attendees
- Process was wide open to start, with capabilities defined
- A full-day spent on barriers to implementing EarthCube capabilities
- NSF did not discuss how it would like to leverage the things it already funds (NEON, GEON, DataONE, IRIS, etc.)
- Those with large NSF positions will likely be the ones granted the EAGER grants
- Significant amount of openness of collaboration
- ESIP got a lot of positive "play", from members rather than the core committees
- ESIP has been invited to participate on EAGER proposals
- Likely to see the large systems argue that EarthCube should be built off of their existing systems
- NSF likely to fund 5 or 6 EAGER grants
- Some groups planning on stringing proposals together
- Tim Killeen will be speaking at winter meeting, likely to leave NSF, no guarantee EarthCube will continue after Tim Killeen is gone
- Are the EAGER grants part of a "down-select" for future EarthCube proposals?
- Other programs outside of EarthCube will probably be used to support EarthCube
- Any feedback or actions for Discovery/ESC from the whitepaper submissions?
- Next step is to try to get on with EAGER proposal teams
- Alternatively, try to assemble a Discovery/ESC team that could be plugged into teams closer to NSF
- Is the outcome of the charrette available yet?
- Does not look like the two-pagers are posted yet
- The capabilities list is posted
- ESIP is trying to avoid competing with its members
- The best thing for ESIP to do is to enable sharing/exchange of knowledge and technology towards a solution
- ESIP will not be building something like EarthCube, rather bringing together members to build it
- The charrettes seemed to be mostly self-serving