Difference between revisions of "Talk:NSF Air Quality Observatory:AQ Observatory Proposal"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
:Each serves their respective communities well, but not the sister communities, so:   
 
:Each serves their respective communities well, but not the sister communities, so:   
 
::AQO will extend these working domain infrastructures by making them interoperable at find/access/use level
 
::AQO will extend these working domain infrastructures by making them interoperable at find/access/use level
::Add new capabilities arising from synergy of the combined resources and tools     
+
::Add new capabilities arising from the synergy of the combined resources and tools     
 
::Thus, the prototype AQO will demonstrate operational inter-domain networking [and encourage other nodes to join?]       
 
::Thus, the prototype AQO will demonstrate operational inter-domain networking [and encourage other nodes to join?]       
  
 
Variations on this theme would be stated in several sections of the proposal.  
 
Variations on this theme would be stated in several sections of the proposal.  
Is this our key theme? Is it too little, much, just right? Enough NSF-appeal?  
+
Is this our key theme? Is there a better way to phrase it? Is it too little, much, just right? Enough NSF-appeal?  
  
 
[[User:Rhusar|Rhusar]]
 
[[User:Rhusar|Rhusar]]

Revision as of 00:31, January 20, 2006

Links to: AQO Proposal Main Page > Proposal | Proposal Discussion| NSF Solicitation | NSF Solicitation Discussion | People



  • To add to the discussion, log in to DataFed wiki
  • Begin each entry with ====Username: Subject====
  • To respond, add dots ====......Username: Subject====
  • Indent response text by adding : for each tab.
  • Sign your entry by ending with '~~~~',








This page contains discussion on various aspects of the proposal.

'Win-theme' for the AQ Observatory project?

Based on our discussions I would propose a common (win-) theme for the AQO project along the following line:

There is already an infrastructure for access/use of met data (Unidata) and for AQ data (DataFed)
Each serves their respective communities well, but not the sister communities, so:
AQO will extend these working domain infrastructures by making them interoperable at find/access/use level
Add new capabilities arising from the synergy of the combined resources and tools
Thus, the prototype AQO will demonstrate operational inter-domain networking [and encourage other nodes to join?]

Variations on this theme would be stated in several sections of the proposal. Is this our key theme? Is there a better way to phrase it? Is it too little, much, just right? Enough NSF-appeal?

Rhusar