RE: GALEON OGCnetwork

• To: <Ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "GALEON email list" <galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: RE: GALEON OGCnetwork
• From: "Ron Lake" <rlake@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 18:03:47 -0700

Hi Ben at al:

I was looking at the WCS spec a few days ago and I noticed that while it uses a 
great deal of GML there are a number of areas where the encoding could be made 
closer without as far as I can see any loss in content.

One example is the use of metadata.  There is a metadatalink element which uses 
the GML association attribute group.  GML provides a metadata property that is 
attached to all GML objects including of course coverages and this can be 
either remote or inline.  For remote references the association attribute group 
also provides the gml:remoteSchema attribute which references a schema fragment 
for the schema in question. In conjunction with a metadata property this would 
point at the metadata schema for the remote metadata.  This thus would 
supersede the type property now used in the WCS.  There are a number of issues 
of this nature that I think could better harmonize GML and WCS that could be 
considered in the Galeon 2 activities.

In addition, we have looked at the issue of coverages where the "domain" is not 
space-time and do not see any real restriction with the current model (in GML) for 
coverages - e.g. coverages that handle say Temperature, Air Density as functions of 
Pressure.  Exploration and development of consensus of this issue should also be part of 
Galeon 2?

Cheers
Ron

I hope you are planning to attend GeoWeb 2006 and this will be a topic for 
discussion there.

From: owner-galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ben Domenico
Sent: April 9, 2006 2:44 PM
To: GALEON email list
Cc: Mark Buehler
Subject: GALEON OGCnetwork



Hi,

I finally got our GALEON OGCnetwork pages set up with all the materials
from the GALEON wiki and into a collection of pages that I think are in
a usable form.

 http://www.ogcnetwork.net/?q=galeon

I believe that anyone (OGC member or not) can establish an OGCnetwork
account and access the associated pages.  I suggest that all GALEON
participants do so and let me know what you think of this approach to
interacting with one another.  We'll have to experiment with editing
privileges, and so forth.  From my experience, this package takes a bit
of getting used to.

I've put in my own ideas for GALEON Phase 2 objectives -- but just as a
starting point for the discussion.  However, if you agree with the first
two goals, it would be good to start work immediately on:

1.      defining the WCS profile for CF-netCDF so we can submit it for
adoption at the June Technical Committee meeting (Please read the draft
and think about what else developers of WCS CF-netCDF clients and
servers will need to know.)
2.      adding new datasets, servers, and clients for continued
experimentation (See if you can find the pointers to datasets on GALEON
WCS servers, and add pointers to a page additional datasets available
via WCS on your server)

Work on the third objective (CSW catalogs for use in GALEON servers)
will be part of a project in which NASA GSFC, GMU, Unidata, and NCDC are
participating.

Of course, other ideas for Phase 2 objectives are welcome and indeed
encouraged.

I know that several GALEON participants are also involved in the GEOSS
Services Network and they have a telecon this coming week, so I'll try
to schedule a GALEON telecon the following week.  How does April 19 work
for you.

-- Ben