Difference between revisions of "ESC Implementation Strategies"
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Direct Funding == | == Direct Funding == | ||
=== Recommend ESC as a program to agencies=== | === Recommend ESC as a program to agencies=== | ||
| − | === Propose to NSF | + | === Propose to NSF programs, esp. Earth Cube === |
| − | === | + | http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2011/nsf11065/nsf11065.jsp |
| + | |||
| + | === Work with (in? around?) data.gov === | ||
| + | |||
== Indirect or Minimalist Funding == | == Indirect or Minimalist Funding == | ||
| + | ===More User Stories=== | ||
| + | Volunteers? | ||
| + | |||
===Branding=== | ===Branding=== | ||
Form a joint ESC effort without dedicated funding, and target ESC as the eventual home of components developed to other proposal calls. Hopefully, eventual deployment to ESC would give such proposals an advantage. | Form a joint ESC effort without dedicated funding, and target ESC as the eventual home of components developed to other proposal calls. Hopefully, eventual deployment to ESC would give such proposals an advantage. | ||
| Line 18: | Line 24: | ||
* Cons: Not clear that NASA wants to use ESDSWG for this; also leaves out key partners in other agencies, academia, commercial world... | * Cons: Not clear that NASA wants to use ESDSWG for this; also leaves out key partners in other agencies, academia, commercial world... | ||
===Steering to a Common Target [Reference?] Architecture=== | ===Steering to a Common Target [Reference?] Architecture=== | ||
| − | Define an architecture; ask participants working on projects to "steer" their development so the products, tools or services fit into the ESC when complete | + | Define an architecture; ask participants working on projects to "steer" their development so the products, tools or services fit into the ESC when complete. |
| + | |||
| + | Any potential synergy with SPG Reference Architecture effort? | ||
| + | |||
===FlashMob === | ===FlashMob === | ||
Everybody go to {some collaborative site} and try collaborating on workflows, tools, data, etc. Candidates would include: | Everybody go to {some collaborative site} and try collaborating on workflows, tools, data, etc. Candidates would include: | ||
| Line 28: | Line 37: | ||
* Google Summer of Code | * Google Summer of Code | ||
* Challenges | * Challenges | ||
| + | ===Interoperate with / Envelop / Leverage Other Systems with Commonality with ESC=== | ||
| + | * DataOne | ||
| + | * Earth System Grid | ||
| + | * NSF EarthCube | ||
| + | * EPA CyAir | ||
| + | Note that interoperability in this context goes beyond catalog or data interoperability to include tool, workflow and social-network interoperability. | ||
Latest revision as of 11:00, July 13, 2011
Potential Earth Science Collaboratory Implementation Strategies and Tactics
Note: these strategies are not mutually exclusive.
Direct Funding
Recommend ESC as a program to agencies
Propose to NSF programs, esp. Earth Cube
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2011/nsf11065/nsf11065.jsp
Work with (in? around?) data.gov
Indirect or Minimalist Funding
More User Stories
Volunteers?
Branding
Form a joint ESC effort without dedicated funding, and target ESC as the eventual home of components developed to other proposal calls. Hopefully, eventual deployment to ESC would give such proposals an advantage.
- Pros: Worked for CEOP
- Cons: May need to be more substantive
Reputation Scoring
Define levels of contributions to construction of ESC and some recognition structure for those different levels. These would be citable in CV's and proposals.
NASA ESDSWG
Make ESC a goal of the NASA Earth Science Working Groups.
- Pros: Technology Infusion, Reuse and Standards and Processes Group currently all work on core needs of the ESC, but are not aiming toward an ESC realization.
- Cons: Not clear that NASA wants to use ESDSWG for this; also leaves out key partners in other agencies, academia, commercial world...
Steering to a Common Target [Reference?] Architecture
Define an architecture; ask participants working on projects to "steer" their development so the products, tools or services fit into the ESC when complete.
Any potential synergy with SPG Reference Architecture effort?
FlashMob
Everybody go to {some collaborative site} and try collaborating on workflows, tools, data, etc. Candidates would include:
- NASA Earth Exchange
- myexperiment.org
ESIP Hackathon
Ultra-low-cost Recruiting
- Google Summer of Code
- Challenges
Interoperate with / Envelop / Leverage Other Systems with Commonality with ESC
- DataOne
- Earth System Grid
- NSF EarthCube
- EPA CyAir
Note that interoperability in this context goes beyond catalog or data interoperability to include tool, workflow and social-network interoperability.
