Re: [galeon] GML coverages / xlink

NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.

And W3C has finalized stabilized xlink in terms of an official document and 
position statement.

Carl

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Woolf, Andrew (STFC,RAL,ESC) 
  To: Peter Baumann 
  Cc: Robin, Alexandre ; Max Martinez ; Ben Domenico ; Unidata Techies ; 
Unidata GALEON ; Carl Reed ; wcs-2.0.swg 
  Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 8:41 AM
  Subject: RE: GML coverages / xlink


  gml:File is one of the most ill-conceived ideas I've seen. I've also never 
seen it being used. The semantics are completely uncontrolled - if someone gave 
me a GML using it, I wouldn't know what to do. xlink semantics are 
well-defined, and the proposed usage gives you (almost) no choice but to 
interpret things correctly.

   

  From: Peter Baumann [mailto:p.baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
  Sent: 20 August 2009 15:28
  To: Woolf, Andrew (STFC,RAL,ESC)
  Cc: Robin, Alexandre; Max Martinez; Ben Domenico; Unidata Techies; Unidata 
GALEON; Carl Reed; wcs-2.0.swg
  Subject: Re: GML coverages / xlink

   

  Andrew-
  looks nice, but how is the relation to the gml:File choice which provides for 
a file embedding alternative as well? Is this redundant functionality?
  -Peter


  Woolf, Andrew (STFC,RAL,ESC) wrote: 

  <RectifiedGridCoverage id="tos_O1_2001-2002">
      <domainSet>
          <RectifiedGrid dimension="3" id="tos_O1_2001-2002.domain">
              <limits>
                  <GridEnvelope>
                      <low>0 0 0</low>
                      <high>23 169 179</high>
                  </GridEnvelope>
              </limits>
              <axisLabels>x y t</axisLabels>
              <origin>
                  <Point id="tos_O1_2001-2002.domain.origin" 
srsName="urn:x-ogc:def:crs:badc:TimeLatLon:2001-01-01:1d">
                      <pos>-79.5 1 1</pos>
                  </Point>
              </origin>
              <offsetVector 
srsName="urn:x-ogc:def:crs:badc:TimeLatLon:2001-01-01:1d">1 0 0</offsetVector>
              <offsetVector 
srsName="urn:x-ogc:def:crs:badc:TimeLatLon:2001-01-01:1d">0 1 0</offsetVector>
              <offsetVector 
srsName="urn:x-ogc:def:crs:badc:TimeLatLon:2001-01-01:1d">0 0 2</offsetVector>
          </RectifiedGrid>
      </domainSet>
      <rangeSet>
          <ValueArray gml:id="tos_O1_2001-2002.range">
              <valueComponent
                  
xlink:href="http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/examples/tos_O1_2001-2002.nc#tos";
                  xlink:role="urn:mimetype:application/x-netcdf" 
xlink:arcrole="QuantityList">
                  <QuantityList uom="K"/>
              </valueComponent>
          </ValueArray>
      </rangeSet>
  </RectifiedGridCoverage>




   

  (The referenced CRS is a composite using a TM_CoordinateSystem 
(gml:TimeCoordinateSystem) for time, with origin 2001-01-01 and interval 'one 
day'.)

   

  Our current CR 07-112 will enable analogous use of CF-netCDF files using 
'auxiliary coordinate variables' for a gml:ReferenceableGrid.

   

  Cheers,

  Andrew

   

  From: Peter Baumann [mailto:p.baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
  Sent: 20 August 2009 10:50
  To: Woolf, Andrew (STFC,RAL,ESC)
  Cc: Robin, Alexandre; Max Martinez; Ben Domenico; Unidata Techies; Unidata 
GALEON; Carl Reed; wcs-2.0.swg
  Subject: GML coverages / xlink (was: Re: [WCS-2.0.swg] CF-netCDF standards 
initiatives)

   

  Andrew-

  I anyway wanted to contact you on the xlink question.

  Your approach as presented at the Boston TC meeting I consider the missing 
link for WCS: we consider coverages delivered as a manifest (XML) and one or 
more encoded files, referenced from the manifest. It seems like your approach 
allows to mimic this in GML. Is that correct?

  As we currently are seriously considering adopting GML for the WCS 2.0 
coverage model such a facility is of high importance to us.

  -Peter

  PS: this might also resolve the dispute of this thread: GML coverages can 
well reference a netCDF file then, can't they?


  Woolf, Andrew (STFC,RAL,ESC) wrote: 

  I'd say the same thing about GML - it's already possible to use GML to 
provide a canonical encoding linked to an underlying conceptual model AND xlink 
to netCDF for the actual content.

   

  Andrew

   

  From: wcs-2.0.swg-bounces+andrew.woolf=stfc.ac.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:wcs-2.0.swg-bounces+andrew.woolf=stfc.ac.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Robin, Alexandre
  Sent: 20 August 2009 09:16
  To: Max Martinez; Ben Domenico; Peter Baumann
  Cc: Unidata Techies; Unidata GALEON; Carl Reed; wcs-2.0.swg
  Subject: Re: [WCS-2.0.swg] CF-netCDF standards initiatives

   

  FYI,

   

  SWE Common can serve to send very efficiently packaged datasets (binary, 
compressed binary) just like NetCDF does while providing robust metadata 
describing the datasets.

  These datasets can be N-D grid coverages, discrete coverages, or any other 
kind of sensor observations or model results.

   

  The point for us to build SWE Common rather than just reusing NetCDF was to 
support efficient random access in huge datasets and real time streaming data 
(which NetCDF is not designed for) with a single model.

  Both cases are supported and I am pretty sure we can generate a SWE Common 
encoded binary stream that is byte-to-byte compatible with the data section of 
a NetCDF file.

   

  Developing a module for the NetCDF API dealing with SWE Common would be quite 
trivial thanks to the harmonization work we have already done.

   

  Regards,

   

  -------------------------------------------------

  Alexandre Robin

  Spot Image, Web and E-Business

  Tel: +33 (0)5 62 19 43 62

  Fax: +33 (0)5 62 19 43 43

  http://www.spotimage.com

  Before printing, think about the environment

   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  De : Robin, Alexandre 
  Envoyé : jeudi 20 août 2009 10:01
  À : 'Max Martinez'; Ben Domenico; Peter Baumann
  Cc : Unidata Techies; Unidata GALEON; wcs-2.0.swg; 'Carl Reed'
  Objet : RE: [WCS-2.0.swg] CF-netCDF standards initiatives

   

  Ben,

   

  I hope we don't have to define a NEW standard but rather work with you to see 
how we can treat your use cases with SWE Common (which already incorporates 
some NetCDF concepts and is VERY close to NcML).

  I already looked at the issue and writing a converter (even the 'on the fly' 
kind) between the two formats should be no problem at all.

   

  Bringing legacy formats (be them pseudo-defacto standards of a community) 
into OGC is NOT going to help interoperability across domains.

   

  Regards,

   

  -------------------------------------------------

  Alexandre Robin

  Spot Image, Web and E-Business

  Tel: +33 (0)5 62 19 43 62

  Fax: +33 (0)5 62 19 43 43

  http://www.spotimage.com

  Before printing, think about the environment

   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  De : 
wcs-2.0.swg-bounces+alexandre.robin=spotimage.fr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:wcs-2.0.swg-bounces+alexandre.robin=spotimage.fr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
 De la part de Max Martinez
  Envoyé : jeudi 20 août 2009 03:19
  À : Ben Domenico; Peter Baumann
  Cc : Unidata Techies; Unidata GALEON; wcs-2.0.swg
  Objet : Re: [WCS-2.0.swg] CF-netCDF standards initiatives

   

  Ben,

   

  What exactly is an "OGC binary encoding standard"? Is CF-netCDF attempting to 
be the first of its kind or are there other examples?

   

  Max

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: wcs-2.0.swg-bounces+max.martinez=erdas.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:wcs-2.0.swg-bounces+max.martinez=erdas.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Ben Domenico
  Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 1:19 PM
  To: Peter Baumann
  Cc: Unidata Techies; Unidata GALEON; wcs-2.0.swg
  Subject: [WCS-2.0.swg] CF-netCDF standards initiatives

   

  Hello,

   

  Some confusion has resulted from the fact that we are pursuing two parallel 
efforts at standardizing CF-netCDF within the OGC.  

   

  The first initiative began a few years ago.  The goal is to establish 
CF-netCDF as an extension standard for WCS encoding of data in binary form.   
Stefano Nativi just sent out an email announcing the latest revision of the 
proposed "discussion paper" on that topic.  This will be discussed and 
hopefully voted on at the September/October TC meeting.

   

  At the same time, we have a new initiative to establish CF-netCDF as a 
separate  OGC binary encoding standard.    This approach will result in a 
binary encoding which can be used with different access protocols, e.g., WFS or 
SOS as well as WCS.   Of course, in the long run, our objective is to tie the 
two approaches together, but we do not want to impede progress on either right 
now by making them formally interdependent.  A very rough draft of the core 
standard for CF-netCDF is on the GALEON wiki at:

   

  http://sites.google.com/site/galeonteam/Home/cf-netcdf-candidate-standard

   

  As you can see, the draft for the OGC core is based on the NASA Earth Science 
Data System standard (NASA ESDS-RFC-011v1.00). We hope to have this candidate 
standard in the proper OGC template form by the September/October TC and will 
have an ad-hoc session at which we plan to establish a SWG.   Since there is 
already a large community of practice, endorsement by other standards groups 
(NASA and NOAA in the US), and solid reference implementations, we hope to move 
forward quickly with this standard.

   

  We would very much like to have as many liaisons as possible between the WCS 
and CF-netCDF working groups to ensure that they are kept in harmony.

   

  -- Ben

   

  -- 
  Scanned by iCritical. 

   






-- Dr. Peter Baumann - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen  
 www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann   mail: 
p.baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178 
- Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 147737)   www.rasdaman.com, 
mail: baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxx   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: 
+49-173-5837882"A brilliant idea is a job halfdone."  

  -- 
  Scanned by iCritical. 

   





-- Dr. Peter Baumann - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen  
 www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann   mail: 
p.baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178 
- Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 147737)   www.rasdaman.com, 
mail: baumann@xxxxxxxxxxxx   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: 
+49-173-5837882"A brilliant idea is a job halfdone." 

  -- 
  Scanned by iCritical. 


  • 2009 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the galeon archives: