1. HMA Follow-On Task 3
Online Data Access in the frame of ESA's Heterogeneous Missions Accessibility (HMA) initiative
Mid Term – AWG Summary 1 1

2. Agenda Management Technical Main Achievements in Past Period
Issues Identified / Mitigation Decisions
Update Delivery Plan / Next steps
Technical
Definitions
WCS 2.0 / EO WCS Appl. Profile
Demonstrations (MapServer WCS 2.0 implementation)
Discussion
Slide 2

3. Management
Slide 3

4. Achievements
WCS 2.0 Core & Extensions had been submitted and OGC voting was initiated
Voting period : 2010/04/20 – 2010/06/19
Current status – suspended (may be continued; approx. more 5 weeks to go)
WCS Adoption Vote has been suspended (2 NO votes; by CSIRO and US Department of Homeland Security)
Comments have been solved, answered and incorporated  "NO-Voters" have been asked to withdraw their "NO" votes to allow continuing of voting procedure
Web Coverage Scenario Workshop at DLR - 9. June 2010
results are currently incorporated in RB documents
OGC TC Meeting (Silver Spring, MD) ( PB)
Slide 4

5. Achievements
Documents reviewed & RIDs received
Comments have been evaluated and possibly applied
Results from WCS workshop are included
Requirement Baseline – Technical Note ( HMA-FO_ODA-RB-TN_EOX-1.1) - Update finished
Requirement Baseline - Software System Specification ( HMA-FO_ODA-RB-SSS_EOX-1.3) - Currently updated
Technical Specification - Software Requirements Specification ( HMA-FO_ODA-TS-SRS_EOX-1.2 ) - Currently updated
Slide 5

6. Achievements EO WCS Appl. Profile v.0.0.1 (OGC 10-140)
GeoTIFF Extension v (OGC )
MapServer (extension development to cover WCS 2.0 & EO WCS)
Parsing of KVP requests
Accept GetCapabilities, DescribeCoverage, and GetCoverage (basic) request
Deliver XML-response to requests
handling of metadata (domain range, nil values, uom, …)
Deliver image
(currently: GeoTIFF externaly linked or embedded in GML)
Link towards Apache
Slide 6

7. Issues / Mitigation Issues: Decisions:
Delay in overall WCS 2.0 standardisation
Extension of the Requirements consolidation phase
Decisions:
Continue Requirements consolidation
Incl. all former HMA/GSCDA requirements and Use Cases
RB documents shall become sole source for ODA Requirements and Use Cases
Start drafting EO WCS AP and needed WCS Extensions now, based on currently existing Documents (not awaiting standardisation)
Reduce efforts for the Demonstrator development
Slide 7

8. Updated Delivery Plan
Requirement Baseline – Technical Note (RB-TN-1.1)  27.May 2010
Requirements Baseline – Software System Specification (RB-SSS-1.3)  23.July 2010
Draft EO WCS Application Profile v0.1  01.Sept (3-week rule prior to TC-Meeting Toulouse)
Draft WCS 2.0 Extension (Coverage Encoding Format, GeoTIFF) v0.1  01.Sept.2010 (3-week rule prior to TC-Meeting Toulouse)
Technical Specification – Software Requirements Specification (TS-SRS)  10.Sept.2010
Design Definition File – Software Design Document (DDF-SDD) 
Design Justification File – Software Verification Plan (DJF-SVerP) 
Slide 8

9. Next Steps
finish updates of requirements documents (including input from WCS workshop and MTR/AWG)
continue with Design documents
continue drafting EO WCS 2.0 Application Profile
continue drafting WCS 2.0 Extensions
Coverage Encoding Format (Manifest), GeoTIFF, [basic CRS (EPSG only), Nil values) ]
continue MapServer WCS 2.0 implementation:
core architecture and design
extension architecture and design
continue WebMapViewer upgrade
Slide 9

10. Technical
Slide 10

11. HMA-FO Task 3 - ODA The Requirements Struggle – a mix of: Approach
WCS 2.0 standard definition
EO WCS Appl. Profile definition
Demonstrator development
Operational System definition
Approach
Collect requirements from stakeholders (Space Data Provider, div. Organisations, GMES projects, etc.)
Generate generic, modularized Use Cases which can be combined to cover more complex needs
Deduct additional requirements needed for Use Cases
Review and Discuss
Slide 11

12. Definitions EO domain users are accustomed to think in:
mainly 2D ( also 3D / 4D )
terms of collection / scenes / products / masks
satellite terms (stripes, FOV, look angle, etc.)
historic reasons (displays, tapes/storage, human readable structures,…)
GIS users work on functional defined, entities which belong together
communities, cities, regions, road network, …
Online Data Access  Coverage
What is it?
Is this a contradiction to scene/products/masks
Slide 12

13. Coverage - simplified Coverage:
Feature that acts as a function to return values from its range for any direct position within its spatial, temporal, or spatiotemporal domain.
Note: In other words, a coverage is a feature that has multiple values for each attribute type, where each direct position within the geometric representation of the feature has a single value for each attribute type.
Examples include a digital image, raster map, and digital elevation matrix.
a Coverage can be: - a scene / product / mask a region / community a road network
very simplified!  every image represents a coverage
Slide 13

14. Collection
Collection: assemblage of images of the same kind i.e. a set of images from the same platform, same sensor, taken with the same parameters (resolution, etc.)
Constraint: for a defined geographic coordinate, and a defined time, there can only be a single image within each collection
using simple WCS 2.0 "trim" (spatial) and "slice" (temporal) functions, therefore allows the selection of single scenes
Slide 14

15. EO WCS Appl. Profile
Slide 15

16. EO WCS AP
Slide 16

17. Demonstrations of the current status of the developments of MapServer WCS 2.0 support
Slide 17

18. MapServer – WCS 2.0 implementation
Slide 18

19. Contacts EOX IT Services GmbH, Austria (Prime)
G.I.M. Geographic Information Management nv/sa, Belgium
Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH, Germany
Spot Image SA, France
Slide 19 19

20. Map- vs. GeoServer MapServer developed under OSGeo umbrella
Both implement WCS 1.0 and 1.1
Both support PostgreSQL/PostGIS DB binding
MapServer provides scripting language bindings → flexibility
MapServer faster handling of raster data → performance
see Technical Specification Document (TS) for further arguments
Conclusion: Combination of MapServer and PostgreSQL/PostGIS is our first choice.
rasdaman candidate for inclusion e.g. advanced concepts
Slide 20

21. Map- vs. GeoServer
From:
Slide 21

22. Template
Template
Slide 22