1. GEO Task AR-07-02 AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Closing Plenary NCAR Mesa Laboratory 25-26 September 2008

2. Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008 Start TimeTopicSpeaker 1330Reports from sessions (10 min *10) Session leaders 1430Break (15 min) 1445Reports from sessions, continuedSession leaders 1525Task Planning: communications, schedule, web presences George Percivall 1555General DiscussionAll 1700Closing

3. Agenda – 25 September

4. Agenda – 26 September

5. Thank you! NCAR hosting of the Kickoff –Richard Anthes, Peter Backlund, Carol Park, Donna Bonnetti IEEE for organizing events all week OGC acknowledges sponsorship from –European Commission –European Space Agency –USGS –ERDAS –Northrop Grumman

6. Session Leader responsibilities - Thanks! Introduce and organize themselves Create an agenda for the session Introduce the session at the opening plenary Lead the session at the kickoff Present the outcomes to the closing plenary Beyond the kickoff we will need leaders for the working groups through March 2009

7. Slide 7 GEO Task AR-07-02 Architecture Implementation Pilot Lead incorporation of contributed components consistent with the GEOSS Architecture… …using a GEO Web Portal and a GEOSS Clearinghouse search facility …to access services through GEOSS Interoperability Arrangements …support GEOSS Societal Benefit Areas

8. Pilot Kickoff Objectives Begin the Execution Phase of the Pilot Refine and develop –Collaboration and interoperability goals –Detailed design based on CFP Architecture. –User scenarios suitable for demonstration. Develop detailed plan and schedule for the Execution Phase

9. Slide originally from Shawn McClureCIRA, Colorado State University Why participate in GEOSS AIP? Better awareness of community interoperability efforts Better understanding and use of proposed GEOSS standards Standardization of intra- and inter-system data exchange Leveraging and reuse of existing resources through service-chaining Increased value of existing development investments Improved resource availability and decision-making for end users

10. AIP-2 Kickoff Sessions SBA, Communities of Practice, Scenario Sessions –Disaster Response –Climate Change and Biodiversity –Renewable Energy –Air Quality and Health Transverse Technology sessions: –Catalogues and Clearinghouse –Service and Dataset Description –Data Product Access: service, schema, encoding –Sensors and Models Access: service, schema, encoding –Workflow for derived product and alert generation –Clients: portals and applications clients –Test Facility for Service Registration

11. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Disaster Response Session Results – Work Plan Ahead Stuart FryeCaribbean Flood Team Ron LowtherNorthrop Grumman Didier GiacobboSpot Image GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

12. Session Primary Participants & Presenters Presented at Kickoff ParticipantTitle YMorris Brill, Michele Mayorga (NGC) Northrop Grumman (NGC) Response to GEOSS AIP-II CFP YStu Frye (NASA)Caribbean Flood Pilot Sensor Web YDidier Giacobbo (Spot Image)Spot Image Response to the GEOSS AIP-2 CFP YJeff de La Beaujardiere (NOAA IOOS) NOAA IOOS Data Integration Framework (DIF) Contribution to the GEO AIP-II Ken McDonald (NOAA) and Dr. Liping Di (GMU) NOAA-NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS joint efforts for persistent GOES data services, weather scenarios, Web… services/ workflows YProf. Natalia Kussul, SRI NASU- NSAU (GEO-Ukraine) Sensor Web for Flood Applications YSatoko H. MIURA and Kengo AIZAWA (JAXA) Catalog Server for ALOS data YSteve Del Greco (NCDC)The Next Generation Weather Radar system SURA/SCOOP, GoMOOS, and NIMSAT Communication of Disasters and Mitigation of Post-Disaster Damage ICAN (Oregan State U.)International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN) Y(CNES) CENTRE NATIONAL DETUDES SPATIALES Disaster Charter Catalog Server for GML-EO Metadata Harvesting and HMA-compliant Web Services Access Y(ERDAS) The Earth to Business Company Geospatial Collaboration and Information Sharing Infrastructure for GEOSS

13. Session Summary and Way Ahead Problems to solve: –Determine future view to have data/products available at the end versus just data crunching –How to cross flow work between SBA and transverse technology groups –Work plan and schedule development for the rest of the AIP-II

14. Session Summary and Way Ahead What is missing and still needed: services, components, and data/product gaps –Services and components limited and not fully ready, have to start and build –Growing availability of data and product providers for persistent exemplarswant to start and build –Complete inventory of the participants components and services and ensure registration –Expand participation to cover all disasters not just floods

15. Session Summary and Way Ahead Paradigm shifts instead of evolutionary development: –Integration needed to link both spectrums: Architecture/technology Data provisions –Some satellites give a continuous global baseline but others not unless we can get a disaster declared work needed for fast response –International Charter Web Services provision

16. Session Summary and Way Ahead Work plan ahead: –Not enough time – WG participants need to further refine cross flow areas and collaboration among participants to develop work plans ahead –Its not all about the demomust work on transverse technology, integration providers, capability to discover archives, rapid data processing… –We will structure our scenario to provide liaison to specific transverse technology areas –Session leads will propose future telecon schedules, email, list membership and wiki moderation

17. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Climate Change and Biodiversity Session Summary S. Nativi (IP3 Team and CNR), Gary Geller (IP3 Team and NASA JPL) GEO AIP-2 Kickoff September 26th, 2008

18. Agenda (Thursday, 25th 13:00 – 14:15) I part: The context Global Federated Climate and Weather systems D. Middleton (NCAR and WMO) Global Biodiversity systems: GeoBON G. Geller (NASA JPL and IP3 Team) and S. Nativi (CNR and IP3 Team) Interoperability process: The IP3 demonstrations S.Nativi (CNR and IP3 Team) II part: Interoperability Architecture: Some AIP-2 Principal NOAA NCDC Response Christina Lief USGS Response Doug Norbert BKG Response Juergen Walther III part: AIP-2 Interoperability experiments & shared use scenarios An interoperability test framework to share resources All Possible collaborative Use scenarios All Conclusions All

19. Session Notes 17-20 person attending. A small room ! Good discussion on the presentations There was a general agreement on the need to try to test resources interoperability in order to enable common use scenarios and facilitate their registration in the GEOSS registries –Interoperability will be pursued by publishing standard interfaces –It is possible to submit some interoperability arrangements proposals to SIF

20. Session Notes Interoperability framework for common CC & Bio use scenarios IP3 Clearinghouse/ Mediator GBIF resources TOPS resources IP3 ENM server ACRF CMBE ACRF access services USGS Maps USGS services NOAA GOSIC NOAA NEXRAD NOAA NIDIS GEOSS Registries GEO-Portals & Clearinghouse Catalogs Inter. Arrangement Inter. Standard IS IA IS IA

21. Session Notes Major Challenge –Get Data not only maps To deal with data multi-disciplinary specific models and encodings To explicit the disciplinary knowledge: the mediator role –Get scientists involved in the use scenarios definition and implementation Start from the IP3 cross-disciplinary process experience Consider the ESRI story board experience

22. Session Notes Some Impediments –Data policy and security constraints –Huge amount of heterogeneous data possibly useful for use scenarios –Several Communities involved Common use scenarios were discussed –CC impact on Biodiversity for the Polar area –Vegetation Change –Protected areas monitoring ?

23. Schedule TaskDeadline To send comments and contributions on use scenarios 20 Oct To look at possible scenarios already defined in other international projects/programmes 20 Nov To set up formal use scenario(s)15 Dec … according to AIP-2 milestones

24. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Energy SBA Session Report Ellsworth LeDrew, University of Waterloo, Canada Thierry Ranchin, Mines ParisTech, France GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

25. Scenario objectives Support the SBA Energy by developing services providing irradiance data among other parameters Simulating the case of the sitting of a solar power plant.

26. ?

27. What we have in hands

28. Meteorological data Access through WSDL to databases: –Monthly means of solar irradiance –Min, max and mean values of air temperature at 2 m –Min, max and mean values of relative humidity at 2 m –HelioClim 3 time series of irradiance (year 2005) –Forecast of meteo data at surface for 3 days to 3 hours –SOLEMI time series irradiance data –NASA–SSE–HelioClim 1 times series of daily irradiance Other types of access –Real time information meteorological data Providers: Mines ParisTech, NCAR, DLR, NASA, Rutherford Appleton Lab

29. Geographical Information Hydrological information for US from NOAA Worldwide Geographical information from USGS

30. Tools PV assessments through PVGIS Server (JRC) Stochastical generation of test datasets for modelling of PV system (MeteoTest) PV Production calculator (MeteoTest) Computation of renewable energy parameters (NASA)

31. What are the missing datasets ?

32. Inventory is needed for having a worldwide coverage. Use of GEO Portals and Registry but also other portals (hydrological network, grids, local demand, roads, environmental and biodiversity information, risks and hazards maps, …) Help from the Data and Products team

33. In the Workflow domain, what do we need?

34. Workflow Help form the Workflow Team Enterprise modeling that will lead to the workflow design Information and Computational Technology views for linking to GEOSS Recommendations for the setting of the service Help on technical bottlenecks

35. AIP-2 Master Schedule Within the coming month: –Planned meeting between Workflow Team, INCOSE and the Team For Nov 2008: –Key design decisions –Refined agenda for setting up the service

36. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Air Quality and Health Scenario Stefan Falke, Rudy Husar, Frank Lindsay, David McCabe GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

37. Who does the air quality scenario benefit? The scenario is quite broad and ambitious, structured around the needs of three end-users: -A policy-maker, needing synthetic assessments of long-range transport of air pollution -An air quality manager, assessing whether an episode qualifies as an exceptional event under AQ regulations Exceptional events such as fires, dust storms are not counted as an exceedance under AQ regulations. In US, petitioners can use any applicable data to show exceptionality of an event. -The public, needing information on air quality now and tomorrow Enables individuals, families to adjust plans if air quality is/will be poor; allows health community, other decision-makers to plan for episodes Respondents Presenting: ESIP-AQ cluster, DataFed, NASA Giovanni, EPA AIRNow, VIEWS-TSS, George Mason U., Northrop-Grumman

38. Air Quality Session What we want to do: SBA goals have been suggested by scenario Very Broad and Ambitious! Searching for fusion / harmonization of many types, domains of AQ data What we have to work with: Data and Tools presented by: AIRNow, Northrop Grumman, VIEWS-TSS, Giovanni How to make it all work: GMU, DataFed: (service-oriented webservice chaining) ESIP-AQ cluster (community AQ portal, catalog, to directly interface w/ GCI)

39. Air Quality Session Results of Discussion Group will define an approach to populate GCI with AQ components and services by working with the ESIP-AQ community catalog This can happen within the AIP schedule Much discussion of how the interface between GCI and community catalog, will work The architecture is not final, but the current iteration needs to be made clearer for stakeholders

40. Next steps: WE HAVE YOUR EMAIL Workspace is live on OGC network: http://www.ogcnetwork.net/node/407 Telecons will be set up shortly AQ SBA will work with transverse tech WGs to clarify architecture

41. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Service and Dataset Description (1C) Session Overview Josh Lieberman Doug Nebert Ted Haberman GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008 Thursday 1300 - 1430

42. Session Agenda Overview of metadata requirements and proposed description strategies for harvesting and search (10 minutes) Introduction of participants (10 minutes) ISO Profile metadata (10 minutes) Use of ISO metadata for service quality and conformance (10 minutes) Open discussion on content and accessibility of discovery metadata (10 minutes) Workplan development (20 minutes) –Task milestones and relation to AIP-2 Master Schedule –Gaps between present practice and AIP discovery use case requirements: discernment and resolution –Impacts and dependencies for work in this thread. –Potential changes to GEOSS Architecture as a result of this work Report from Data Product Access session on metadata for deep content access and service binding. (5 minutes)

43. Without metadata, SOA itself would be impossible Datasets Service Instances Community Catalogs Provisions Clearinghouse Harvests / Cascades Service / Dataset Description Metadata Get Capabilities ? ? ? Service Instances Datasets Community Catalogs

44. GEO Web Site Client Tier Business Process Tier Access Tier GEO Web Portal GEOSS Registries Services Components Standards GEONETCast Other Services Product Access Services Model Access Services Community Portals Client Applications Requirements Community Catalogues Portrayal Servers Workflow Management Processing Servers Other Services GEOSS Clearinghouse Sensor Web Services Alerts/Feeds Servers Infrastructure Registries IOC Architecture – (Service) Types GEO Web Portal(s)

45. Resource Discovery Questions Datasets –Data type / feature type –Observable(s) –Coverage in space and time –Origin / authority –Quality / usage Services –Service type –Accessed content / data –Functionality / operations / options –Bindings –Quality Catalogs Record types Holdings / collections Supported interfaces Queryable properties Response types / formats Tags / categories / relations Portals / applications Functionality Client interfaces Supported workflow Intended users Technology platform

46. Resource Description Relationships Dataset Description Service Description Collection Description Product Description Catalog Description Application Description Workflow Description Provision Operatio n Provision Operatio n Operates on Provided by Derivative Description

47. Discussion Topics What is scope of this topic? –Architectural segmentation – no –Common metadata elements and mechanisms - yes Essential description elements come not from mandatory minimums but from essential questions –Search questions –Evaluation (understanding) questions –Selection questions –Binding questions ISO 19115 –Rich source of elements for describing and documenting diverse resources –Requires profiling and best practice to be useful for GEOSS –There are extension elements in 19115, but element use has to be schema-compliant

48. Discussion Topics, 2 ISO Profile: what is it and what is a profile? –Profile of ISO 19115 and 19119 (19139 XML encoding) to describe coupled dataset and service identification –Application profile of OGC CS/W which defines record types for the above metadata elements –(Pending) Mapping of metadata elements to/from ebRIM registry objects Leaf catalog problem – what to do with unregistered community catalog content? –Should descriptions distinguish between registered and unregistered? –How many mappings are needed / desired Global identities for describing & maintaining resource relationships –Identity mechanism –What entities need to be distinguished (e.g. datatype, data product, data representation, service instance, observable, unit)?

49. Discussion Topics, 3 How to define and test conformance? –Schema conformance –Link conformance –Conformance to reality Metalevels –Data vs data collections vs data aggregates/ synopses –Same levels in metadata (and maybe more levels) Versioning and persistence –4D / 5D extent description

50. Workplan Elements for Metadata Thread Interact with Scenario Groups to define critical searches the catalog questions and resource types Refine of federated resource discovery use cases Define common description metadata profiles and formats Agree, support, register metadata exchange mechanisms Agree community catalog collection records to support discretionary federated queries

51. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Catalogue and Clearinghouse (2C) Session Overview Josh Lieberman Doug Nebert Kengo Aizawa GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

52. Session Agenda Introduction to GEOSS Clearinghouse environment (Josh Lieberman, 10 min) Status of GEOSS Clearinghouse deployments (ESA, Compusult, ESRI, USGS, 5 min each): –Capabilities for metadata harvest and query distribution - supported metadata formats, structures, interfaces –Strategy and requirements for registered catalogues in GEOSS Svc Reg –Commonality and distinctiveness among deployments Brief status from community catalogue operators (5-10 minutes each) on: –Focus of catalogue (audience, # recs, geo extent) –Registration status with GEOSS Service Registry –Service protocol used –Metadata structure(s) used –Collection representations –Issues: findability, accessibility, interoperability, currency Next Steps discussion - What goals and activities on the Clearinghouse and catalogues for AIP-II? (10min)

53. Discussion Topics, 1 Distributed query vs harvest – community catalogs would like to receive usage stats from Clearinghouse cache (ROI measurements and feedback) Disambiguation – duplication – different metadata for the same data may be useful, but would like to remove duplicated metadata General issue of collecting and acting on user feedback Is Clearinghouse success the discovery of or the access to content? Interoperability – what is the measure of interchange between clearinghouse instances and discovery clients?

54. Session Issues, 2 More interaction in distributed searches – needs harvested collection metadata from distributed catalogs from which to draw hints Architecture issues –GEOSS architecture is not segmented by SBA –Resources are contributed by or pertain to communities which in turn can be categorized by one or more SBAs. –Communities are overlapping and there is no orthogonal layer or hierarchy of community catalogs which represent all services. Architecture therefore cannot itself solve recursion and ambiguity problems in harvesting and distributed search To what extent should the clearinghouses go beyond discovery (to evaluation, selection, binding)?

55. Workplan Elements for Catalogue / Clearinghouse WG Persistence, completeness, findability More resources and resource types, e.g. applications, workflows Minimum interoperability measures, e.g. geoss:Record Best practices for federated harvest and query User requirements refinement and added registry / clearinghouse value Controlled vocabularies, mediation resources, cross-community enablement On-going role for search and discovery in scenarios and decision support applications Facilitation of usable OpenSearch / GeoSearch entry points to the Clearinghouse Role for publish-subscribe-notify interaction style in Clearinghouse

56. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Data Products Access Session Overview Hans-Peter Plag, UNR Glenn Rutledge, NOAA NOMADS Hervé Caumont, OGC IP Team / ERDAS GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

57. Data Product Access responses 23 Primary responses: CIESIN, CNES, EPA, ESA, GEO-Ukraine, ICAN, ICT4EO, IP3, ISPRA, JAXA, Mines Paris Tech, NASA World Wind, NOAA IOOS, NOAA NCDC GOSIC, NOAA NCDC NEXRAD, NOAA NCDC NIDIS, NOAA NCDC NOMADS, NOAA/NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS, Northrop Grumman, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS, Spot Image, USGS, Washington Univ St. Louis 15 Contributing responses: ACRF, Caribbean Flood Team, ERDAS, ESIP AQ Cluster, ESRI, ESRI Canada, NOAA SNAAP

58. Session Agenda Introduction: once the client has discovered a service......how to ensure (strong word but) the client application can bind to that service, i.e use service metadata, and then use data through integration in a local data model Presentations by primary participants: –ICAN –CIESIN –GALEON

59. Participation ~ 34 participants, mainly representatives of data providers from governmental agencies, data centers, universities, private companies, also providers of infrastructure for data providers and distribution, such as GEONETCast; from a number of countries and disciplines; very little end-user representation, if any. Most time was spend on presentations.

60. Analysis of common themes from presentations Common features: –Although all services have a web interface for access, there is a wide range of approaches, complexity, data models and concepts. –Although most presentations emphasized a user link, it was not clear who these users are. –Most services seemed to have a limited set of data formats and projections with little options for users to request what they need. We recommend providing more descriptions (Capabilities…) –Promotion of the services does not seem to be a key focus.

61. Conclusions There are to many different standards that users have to know in order to access data. Too much workload is put on the user (example re-analysis data versus web page: a user of reanalysis data needs to learn the variety of formats, while a web user doesn't have to care about what language was used to encode the web page, the browser does this for the user.)? We need to focus more on this aspect of reducing the workload for the user. Guiding principle: Determine what few things need to be the same so that everything else can remain different !!!

62. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Sensors and Models Access Session Overview Anwar Vahed, ICT4EO Luis Bermudez, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS Don Sullivan Caribbean Flood Team GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

63. Sensors and Models Access: service, schema, encoding Scenarios –Disaster response for Floods and Fire Sensors and Models –Sensors: EO-1, TRMM, Envisat, MODIS,... –Models: WRF and CALPUFF, Bluesky,... Technologies –Sensor Web Enablement (SOS, SAS, SPS,...) –Model output in WCS / WMS / SOS

64. Agenda Co-lead introduces the session (2 minutes) Goal: discuss major issues and prioritize Self introductions of persons in the session (5 minutes) Presentations by several primary participants (20 minutes) Briefly describe your end-to-end scenario (what we have now) Mayor problems Recommend next steps GEO-Ukraine (5 min) VIEWS (5 min) ICT4EO (5 min) Northrop (5 min) Open Discussion (60 minutes) Priorities for next steps Milestones

65. Issues SOS / XML records are too large –improve 52North, look at: compression, WCS, CSML, BinaryXML. No timely access of satellite imagery for disaster response – revise UN charter call methods No minimum/uniform description metadata for models that allow model-model model- observation comparisons. –explore other activities (ESML,CMAS,..)

66. Issues No uniform coding and naming conventions for model metadata values –Need semantic mediation and conventions –GO-ESSP (Glenn Rutledge) No standard sub-setting of model output Specifications too loose for encoding data in XML –look for or produce guidance Need FUNDING for underserved areas for instruments to improve ops and cal/val Need Intergovernmental/interagency communication/agreements/harmonization of objectives

67. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Workflow Session Report Liping Di Satoshi Sekiguchi Greg Yetman GEOSS AIP-2 Kickoff 25-26 September 2008

68. Session Agenda Co-lead introduces the session (5 minutes) Self introductions of persons in the session (10 min) Presentations by several primary participants (30 min) –GeoBrain (Liping Di) –GeoGRID (Satoshi Sekiguchi) –Population WPS (Greg Yetman) –Workflow for Floods (Nataliia Kussul) –Service Orchestration (Jolyon Martin) Open Discussion (10 min) Establish matrix of service providers and services Develop a work plan for the topic: dates and actions

69. SBA Scenarios & Workflow (revised) Air Quality Renewable Energy Disaster Response Biodiversity and Climate Service-chaining, Workflows

70. Approach Register early, register often! Inventory available services Mix & match existing services with scenario requirements: identify gaps Use workflow engines as appropriate for chaining Coordinate activities with cross-cutting technology groups; ensure that solutions fit within the architecture and support the SBAs –any shortcomings identified should be brought to the attention of the appropriate architects

71. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Client Applications Sessions Sessions Report Session Points of Contact: Nadine Alameh, MobileAps Hervé Caumont, OGC IP Team / ERDAS September 26th, 2008

72. Client Applications 5 Primary responses: Compusult, ESRI, ESA; CNES, ERDAS, NASA World Wind 19 Contributing responses: BKG, Caribbean Flood Team, CIESIN, ESIP AQ Cluster, Mines Paris Tech, GEO-Ukraine, ICAN, ICT4EO, IP3, ISPRA, NOAA NCDC GOSIC, NOAA NCDC NEXRAD, NOAA NCDC NIDIS, NOAA SNAAP, NOAA/NASA GOES-R and GMU CSISS, Northrop Grumman, SURA/NIMSAT/GoMOOS, USGS, Washington Univ St. Louis

73. Session Agenda (1) CA Offerings: Many community portals are emerging to serve various community practices. How do these applications connect to GEOSS? How can they leverage the Common Infrastructure and how can they best contribute their offerings into this global system without having to reinvent the wheel with each community or application. Presentations by primary participants: –GEO portals: ESRI, ESA, Compusult –Communities: NOAA GOSIC, NOAA GeoNETCast, Washington Univ. –Reusable components : NASA WorldWind and ERDAS TITAN Network

74. Session Agenda (2) CA Collaborations: what are the possible collaboration scenarios in order to achieve cross-domain, value-added applications within GEOSS ? Presentations by primary participants: –Mines Paris Tech SoDA

75. Open discussion GEO Portal Requirements Is GEO branded and persistent for GEOSS Support web presence for all 9 SBAs Assurance of connect to CH Request for content to fuel SBA outcomes and visibility Community Portals definition Access to value-added products Search some catalogs Issue with discovery of community portals within GEOSS Needs api to clearinghouse content Commonalities Both are GEO Registered Provides a user interface to Web resources Need workflow support (user interface for discover and chain) May provide reusable assets for discovery, viewing, etc (portlets, …)

76. Outcomes Define the AIP-2 work plan in order to first –Augment the GCI Refine asap the taxonomies useful for registering Simplify the user interface –Foster System to System interoperations Web Portals <> Service Providers (at least provide WFS/WCS client applications for downloads, plus Map view when portrayal service on same data is provided) Among Web Portals (content sharing) –Page links, Feeds, … manage URLs, publish feeds or mail alerts for news on content updates… Web Portals <> users : –Collaborative spaces to support Communities of practice, or help create cross-domain CoP

77. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Test Facility for Service Registration Session Overview Jolyon Martin, ESA Doug Nebert, USGS GEO AIP-2 Kickoff September 25th, 2008

78. Test Facility for Service Registration Primary Participants: –BKG: ISO Profile conformance test –ESA: Persistent Testbed resources –USGS: FGDC service checker 11 participants in the session Topics: –Conformance test –Persistent testbed –Operations testing Results: –Testing resources identified –Missing resources identified Action: Register the URLs of the test interfaces Action: Create a proxy view for service testing endpoint Way Forward –Support to scenarios

79. Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008 Start TimeTopicSpeaker 1330Reports from sessions (10 min *10) Session leaders 1430Break (15 min) 1445Reports from sessions, continuedSession leaders 1525Task Planning: communications, schedule, web presences George Percivall 1555General DiscussionAll 1700Closing

80. AIP-2 Kickoff Workshop Task Planning: Working Groups, Communications, schedule, web presences Jolyon Martin, ESA Doug Nebert, USGS GEO AIP-2 Kickoff September 25th, 2008

81. Project Planning topics Working Groups Communications Plan Anticipating additional participants Milestones and schedule

82. AIP-2 Working Groups (WGs) SBA, Communities of Practice, Scenario Sessions –Disaster Response –Climate Change and Biodiversity –Renewable Energy –Air Quality and Health Transverse Technology sessions: –Clearinghouse, Catalogues, Registries and Metadata –Access Services: products, sensors, models –Workflow and Alerts –Portals and Application Clients –Test Facility

83. Communication Plan Telecons –AIP Plenary Telecon – Tuesdays Alternating topics: SBAs and Trans Tech Beginning 30 September – next Tuesday –WG telecons as defined by WG leaders E-mail list-servers –One plenary list –One list per work group –Hosted by OGC; will send directions on how to register GEO ftp site – may be available for our use? Collaborative Workspaces

84. Cross-linking, Communication: Collaboration Environment for AIP Pilot 2008-07-07 R.Husar (rhusar@me.wustl.edu) WG Summary, Uniform look for WGs Drupal based More stable Links to Detail workspace Workspace for Specific WGs Wiki Style More Dynamic ESIP or Google Groups

85. Collaboration Elements Mailing Lists –Plenary –Working group OGCNetwork pages –Group logistics –Compiled / organized work results –Managed by WG leads Google Groups –Participant-created pages / page content –Documents uploaded and attached to pages –Discussion forums (?) –Participant-organized

86. OGC Network Example

87. Wiki Example

88. Google Groups Example

89. Anticipating additional participants European Commission: DANTE GEONETCast GEOGrid

90. Comments What is the relationship between SBA and Transverse Technology work groups? –SBAs identify needs satisfied by Transverse WGs –Transverse groups need to formulate questions to SBA How do you cross-grain the SBA scenarios –Transverse Technology groups

91. DevelopmentActivities Kick-offWorkshop Call for Participation ConceptDevelopment PersistentOperations(AR-07-01) Participation ArchitectureDocumentation Updates for each step Baseline AR-07-02 Architecture Implementation Pilot Evolutionary Development Process Operational Baseline and Lessons Learned for next evolutionary spiral Continuous interaction with external activities AI Pilot Development Approach

92. AIP-2 Schedule – Development Phase

93. Closing Plenary – 26 September 2008 Start TimeTopicSpeaker 1330Reports from sessions (10 min *10) Session leaders 1430Break (15 min) 1445Reports from sessions, continuedSession leaders 1525Task Planning: communications, schedule, web presences George Percivall 1555General DiscussionAll 1700Closing