Difference between revisions of "Solta 2011 Agenda"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Line 147: Line 147:
 
'''Which glue keeps it together?''' Trust and personal affinity. Common objectives and scientific values. Mutual respect. Mutual benefit (win-win). Complementarity. Donor dictate <br>
 
'''Which glue keeps it together?''' Trust and personal affinity. Common objectives and scientific values. Mutual respect. Mutual benefit (win-win). Complementarity. Donor dictate <br>
 
'''„Lethal“ ingredients.''' Turf mentality. Budget discrepancies. Too much competition. Lack of data and information exchange. Donor jealousy<br>
 
'''„Lethal“ ingredients.''' Turf mentality. Budget discrepancies. Too much competition. Lack of data and information exchange. Donor jealousy<br>
 +
----
 +
What can we do to achieve a "win-win" situation?
  
 
==Thu  10.30-12.30: ADN user relations/help..whom, what?==
 
==Thu  10.30-12.30: ADN user relations/help..whom, what?==

Revision as of 01:47, August 1, 2011

< Back to AQ CoP.png | Workshops | Air Quality Data Network

Monday Evening: Registration and Social

Tue 8.00-10.00: Self-Introduction, 5 mins/participant

In order to make efficient use of our time in Croatia, we ask you all to prepare for the workshop in the following ways (aside from arranging your travel etc.):

  • Slides 1-2: Name, Institution, Relevant research, development or organizational work on AQ data system interoperability and networking
  • Slide(s) 3-(4): Involvement and participation in projects, programs, i.e. list of Integrating Initiatives. Potential contributions.

Tue 10.30-12.30: Hubs, servers, ADN, CoP

This session will be a status report on the current state of data accessibility and networking.

  • Short description of major data hubs
  • current state of AQ data networking with the standards based community based server software
  • Role of GEO AQ CoP

Tue 16.00-18.00: IT: Community server software

This sessions is standards and conventions | Implementation for gridded and station data | Development tools | Server performance

Data Servers: Technical Realization (IT) Issues and Solutions

  • WMS for display. Issues? Atm. Composition Portal contribution
  • WFS .. for station description
  • WCS data encoding
    • Data structure hierarchy: DataHub; Service; Coverage: Field; Flag
    • WCS 1.1: Service->Group of similar datasets; Coverage->>Dataset; Filed->Parameter; Flag->Flag
    • Combination of W*S services: WCS->Access data; WFS->Access spatial metadata; WMS->Display spatial data

Real Data-to-WCS-Mapping tructure

  • Data hub that exposes the data ==> Provider ==> WCS Service
  • Observation platform or network ==> Dataset ==> WCS Coverage
  • Observation parameter/variable ==> Parameter ==> WCS Field

Issues re. the use of netCDF and other data formats
netCDF is standard format for multi-dimensional data. Cf-netCDF is used both as an archival format of grid data as well as a payload format for WCS queries.

  • Issue: ambiguity of CF
  • Issue: We should define a standard python interface (PyNIO, python-netcdf4, scipy.io.netcdf?)
  • Issue: Delivery of (small) data sets in ASCII/csv format
  • Issue: Reading of grib data (?)

Use of WMS, WCS, WFS .. in combination?
Data display/preview is through WMS. AQ data can be delivered through WCS, WFS. In AComServ, WCS for transferring ndim grid and point-station data; WFS for deliver monitoring station descriptions.

  • Issue: WMS interface for preview; "latest" token for dynamic links?

WCS versions
WCS is implemented in multiple versions: 1.0, 1.12, 2.0. The AQ Community Server (AComServ) is now implemented using WCS 1.1.2. Define here the WCS version (WCS 2.0) issue in about one sentence
Gridded data service through WCS
This generally works well.

  • Issue: Extraction of vertical levels?
  • Issue: Ambiguity of WCS; core plus extended (do we know what is valid?)

Delivery of station-point data

  • Issue: use WCS or WFS, Combination of both?
  • Access rights?

Data server performance issues/solutions?
Define performance issues, measurements
Server co-development tools, methods
Server code is maintained through SourceForge, Darcs code repositories are available at WUSTL and in Juelich.

  • Issues: Version control, Platform independence, Documentation

Tue 16.00-18.00: NoIT: ADN scope, providers, users..

What is the purpose of ADN?
Who are the participating users of the network? What are their roles?
What organizations are stakeholders in the network?
How do they relate to ADN?

Wed 8.00-10.00: Reports from breakout sessions and general discussion

Report from the IT breakout session: Community server software
Report from non IT breakout session:ADN scope, providers, users..

Possible discussion topics/focus on cross-overs between IT and non-IT issues

  • standard definitions (clarity, ambiguity, completeness, ...)
  • standard development and documentation
  • open-source server software development
  • platform issues, portability
  • coding language(s), code interchangeability
  • coding style and software development approaches
  • Data Content
  • organisation of data
  • data formats, standard compliance
  • data access
  • performance
  • flexibility
  • user friendliness
  • meeting user demands (fitness for purpose)
  • governance, responsibilities, etc.
  • Open Source collaborative approach. Issues?
  • General software design: Multi-layer, Multi-protocol. Standard-Convention driven
  • Porting, Installation. Issues?
  • Maintenance, governance. Issues?
  • Criteria for single (trusted ?) 'primary' data source
  • Designations for secondary, derived, augmented data sources

Wed 10.30-12.30: AQ network: Servers, Catalog, Clients

Preparing the way forward...

What few things must be the same, so that everything else can be different?

Metadata for finding and understanding, CF, ISO)
Data access/use constrains, quality control, data versioning, etc.
What is the design philosophy
Service oriented (everything is a service), Component and network design for change; open source (everything?!)
Network-level data flow, usage statistics (GoogleAnalytics), performance

... goal is to obtain a good basis for discussion in the following breakout sessions, both from the IT and non-IT sides.

Wed 16.00-18.00: IT: Other servers & catalog

  • Server Software Design (uFIND). Issues?

Functionality of an Air Quality Data Network Catalog (ADNC)?
Content and structure (granularity) of ADNC?
Interoperability of ADNC

  • Interoperability with whom? what standards are needed? CF Naming extensions?
  • AQ Discovery Metadata Convention (for use in ISO, Data Catalogs...)
  • Extend CF Naming conventions for Point Data
  • Devise human-readable CF naming equivalents?

Access rights and access management

What are the generic (ISO, GEOSS, INSPIRE) and the AQ-specific discovery metadata?
Minimal metadata for data provenance, quality, access constrains?
Single AQ Catalog? Distributed? Service-oriented?

  • GI-cat
  • uFind

Wed 16.00-18.00: NoIT: Links, coop., governance..

  • User perspective, value chain .. user can not find..


Relationships, cross-thematic links (EGIDA, ESIP) How can we collaborate?

Group dinner

Thu 8.00-10.00: Networking impediments, opportunities

  • Clear statements about obstacles..
    • no organizational structure,
    • no dedicated funding or
    • no clear idea yet how to do it (or several independent ideas?).
  • Opportunities, fixes
    • Identification of manageable work packages
    • Reusable components, resources

JJ Bogardi, Global Water System Project (GWSP) at EGIDA, Bonn:
Nature of Networking Projects: Complex funding .., multiple obligations. Interdisciplinary and international. Differing project maturity. Mixture of paid and voluntary contributors. Governance and project cultures may differ.
Which glue keeps it together? Trust and personal affinity. Common objectives and scientific values. Mutual respect. Mutual benefit (win-win). Complementarity. Donor dictate
„Lethal“ ingredients. Turf mentality. Budget discrepancies. Too much competition. Lack of data and information exchange. Donor jealousy


What can we do to achieve a "win-win" situation?

Thu 10.30-12.30: ADN user relations/help..whom, what?

  • Target User communities
  • Use cases for different applications... from scientists to managers, media people and the general public)?
  • How can users find out about (each) system? Big future issues: data quality, traceability, metadata..

Relationship to non-AComServ WCS servers

  • Issue: protocol compatibility, standard compliance, data format(s)
  • Issue: is there a need?
  • Issue: which protocols? (OpenDAP?, GIS servers?)

Thu 16.00-18.00: Outputs, outcomes, plans ?

What are the anticipated outputs? Agreement on community WCS server for grid and point data; server governance, distributed catalog; workshop summary
What are the anticipated outcomes? Better understanding of the network, higher level of trust and concrete steps toward turning the ADN from virtual to real
What are the short-term opportunities? Do we have Common long-term goals and visions?

Friday: Boat trip