NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
I think it's a good time to have this discussion. Just to put my stake in the sand - I think all these protocols are important and have their place in different scenarios. The key (as always) is the underlying information model - I tried to make this argument in a presentation at the Interop Day in Boulder a while back. For CSML, conformance with O&M has always been of fundamental importance - the CSML feature types are specialisations of the O&M Sampling Features. I've also argued in the past for a simple pattern in the case of sampling features that makes it all fall into place for the majority of our kind of data - for Sampling Features, the Observation result is a coverage. The different protocols are suited to serving up different parts of the information model. Look forward to the discussion in Spain! Regards, Andrew
From: galeon-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:galeon-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ben Domenico Sent: 17 September 2008 01:41 To: Unidata GALEON Subject: [galeon] GALEON-related OGC Coverages Discussions Hi, In this morning's Coverages Working Group session at the OGC Technical Committee meetings, several topics of interest to GALEON came up. Dominic Lowe was not able to attend these meetings, so I gave a presentation on his WCS client addition to the OWSLib python library and the way it's been used to give several of the GALEON WCS server sites a bit of light exercise. I put the presentation onto the GALEON wiki at: http://galeon-wcs.jot.com/WikiHome/Other%20GALEON-related%20Presentations/Exercising_WCS_with_Python_ppt___122161164045030_523301361773225?jot.downloadName=Exercising+WCS+with+Python.ppt&theme=none Second, Charles Roswell noted that the ISO 19123 Coverage specification (which is also an OGC spec) is up for revision if enough people and organizations think it needs revision and are willing to work on it. Note this is the ISO Coverage spec not the OGC WCS spec. 19123 is a very abstract spec that describes the general data model for coverages. Finally, there is a movement to have a joint session at the next OGC TC meeting that would focus on a discussion of a use case that involves collections of point/station data and other non-gridded datasets. The idea would be to try to figure out how WCS, WFS, and the Sensor Web Enablement Sensor Observation Service can/should be used for serving this sort of data. As I mentioned at the coverages meeting this morning, this seems particularly germane to GALEON and to some of the topics I believe the GO-ESSP group is addressing for netCDF and CF conventions this week at their meeting in Seattle. I would very much like to jump on this opportunity to have a free wheeling discussion on the topic at the next OGC TC meeting the first week in December. It's time we come up with a strategy for dealing with the many formal and community standards that touch on these non-gridded data collections that are such an important part of the GALEON community data systems. Please let me know if you are interested in pursuing this topic -- especially if you'll be attending the December OGC TC meeting and would be willing to participate in such a special session. I plan to begin setting up the logistics during the current meetings, so get back to me soon if you have suggestions for how to go about this. -- Ben
galeon archives: