Difference between revisions of "Talk:GEOSS AIP AQ Scenario"

From Federation of Earth Science Information Partners
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Archive box|[[/Archive 1]]}}
 
 
 
==Ispra Meeting Report -- [[User:Jwhite airnow|Jwhite airnow]]  13 February 2008 (EST)==
 
==Ispra Meeting Report -- [[User:Jwhite airnow|Jwhite airnow]]  13 February 2008 (EST)==
 
Hi all.  Just wanted to let you know the ADC meeting went well.  There was about a dozen attendees at the Air Quality and Health Session (Frank Lindsay has the actual list) and we walked through the scenario that was developed on the ESIP wiki.  We received some feedback and the good thing was no gaps were identified.  There was no objection to any of the areas outlined in the scenario.  The action items resulting from these discussions are to: 1) revisit and finalize the Air Quality and Health Scenario if we feel it is needed (we rushed up to the last minute),  2) Identify other organizations or potential GEOSS users to get additional input, feedback, and buy-in (i.e., obviously others were not at the meeting, not included in the GEOSS loop - so can we reach out to them to see if they can provide input/feedback - such as EEA), and 3) Work with the GEO UIC to finalize scenario (get their input - see email thread
 
Hi all.  Just wanted to let you know the ADC meeting went well.  There was about a dozen attendees at the Air Quality and Health Session (Frank Lindsay has the actual list) and we walked through the scenario that was developed on the ESIP wiki.  We received some feedback and the good thing was no gaps were identified.  There was no objection to any of the areas outlined in the scenario.  The action items resulting from these discussions are to: 1) revisit and finalize the Air Quality and Health Scenario if we feel it is needed (we rushed up to the last minute),  2) Identify other organizations or potential GEOSS users to get additional input, feedback, and buy-in (i.e., obviously others were not at the meeting, not included in the GEOSS loop - so can we reach out to them to see if they can provide input/feedback - such as EEA), and 3) Work with the GEO UIC to finalize scenario (get their input - see email thread

Revision as of 13:35, April 24, 2008

Ispra Meeting Report -- Jwhite airnow 13 February 2008 (EST)

Hi all. Just wanted to let you know the ADC meeting went well. There was about a dozen attendees at the Air Quality and Health Session (Frank Lindsay has the actual list) and we walked through the scenario that was developed on the ESIP wiki. We received some feedback and the good thing was no gaps were identified. There was no objection to any of the areas outlined in the scenario. The action items resulting from these discussions are to: 1) revisit and finalize the Air Quality and Health Scenario if we feel it is needed (we rushed up to the last minute), 2) Identify other organizations or potential GEOSS users to get additional input, feedback, and buy-in (i.e., obviously others were not at the meeting, not included in the GEOSS loop - so can we reach out to them to see if they can provide input/feedback - such as EEA), and 3) Work with the GEO UIC to finalize scenario (get their input - see email thread below) for the upcoming CFP in March 2008.

An additional action item is to work with Dr. Ellsworth LeDrew (below), the other co-chair of the GEO UIC, in developing a one day workshop/demonstration at the upcoming GEO UIC meeting in Toronto, Canada specifically for the Air Quality and Health Scenario. The GEO UIC wants to highlight the Air Quality and Health Scenario to its members to show the progress GEOSS is making.

As an aside - the other benefits gained during the meeting is a better understanding of international standards (for the AIRNow-International scoping study - will get reference materials from OGC website from the meeting) as well as GEOSS itself. We (AIRNow) need to further identify and register our available data and information in the GEOSS registries/Clearinghouse/User Portals/Catalogs. Thanks! jw

On AIP Evolution, Persistance -- 15 February 2008 (EST) -- Rhusar 04:35, 15 February 2008 (EST)

080214 AIPilot Evolution Persistency.png In his Ispra AIP presentation, George Percivall, OGC states that based on participants feedback, there is a modified approach to AIP: (1) Increase the influence of system users; (2) Make the process iterative, evolutionary with open participation; (3) Seek operational systems, not demos (4) Phased/iterative approach to operational systems - structured plan within each phase. This evolutionary approach will make it easier to achieve the desired persistent networked AQ Information systems. Thanks George! Rhusar 04:35, 15 February 2008 (EST)

"Workshop on User Validation of GEOSS Architecture Using an Air-Quality Scenario” on May 5, Toronto -- Rhusar 19:47, 4 March 2008 (EST)

This is to inform the ESIP Air Quality Cluster and other interested parties of the upcoming workshop,"User Validation of GEOSS Architecture Using an Air-Quality Scenario”. The purpose of the workshop is to use the Air Quality Scenario to develop and validate the interaction between the User Interface and Architecture activities of GEOSS.

More on this:2008-03-04: GEOSS User Interface Meet, May 6-8, Toronto

Re: "Workshop on User Validation of GEOSS Architecture Using an Air-Quality Scenario” on May 5, Toronto -- Ellsworth LeDrew

Greetings:Thankyou for taking the initiative on this and we welcome your posting. We would be pleased to help with your continued development of the air quality theme within GEO. Regards Ells