[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Java-dev] XML Standards



People should be aware that the WMO Core metadata schema will be heavily 
revised in the next six months ... separating the ISO19115 metadata schema 
from an application schema which describes things like BUFR more compactly 
etc ... so what is there now is definitely not something to invest time in!

Happy holidays
Bryan

On Friday 23 December 2005 16:28, Robb Kambic wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Aaron Braeckel wrote:
> > What I have been looking at is a bunch of schemas at
> > http://www.wmo.int/web/www/WDM/Metadata/WMOCore_v0-2_040916/
> >
> > In particular, though, I am looking at
> > http://www.wmo.int/web/www/WDM/Metadata/WMOCore_v0-2_040916/metar_templat
> >e_v0_2.xml. I don't know whether this is in proposal stage or not.
>
> Aaron,
>
> wow, this seems to be the metadata standard that the WMO approved. The
> metadata overhead is large considering the small amount of data in the
> reports. the <contentInfo> implies that the data should be included and
> all the elements <featureAttribute> does not cover all of the 140+ METAR
> fields that can exist in a report.
>
> I don't favor this at all, maybe if the metadata was used like a THREDDS
> catalog metadata, and all the files(reports) are represented as urls. The
> idea is that the metadata would only be represented once and all the
> reports would be in a directory under it. But this is almost another
> topic.
>
> I did create a java METAR decoder that produces XML in the following
> format. This method only produces parameters for the fields in the report.
>
> robb...
>
> <reports>
> <station name="KDTN">
>         <parameter name="Date" value="2005-12-23T12:15:00"/>
>         <parameter name="Report" value="KDTN 231215Z AUTO 16005KT 3SM VCTS
> +RA BR OVC026 23/23 A2991 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT SW AND W P0006"/>
>         <parameter name="Report_Type" value="METAR"/>
>         <parameter name="AUTOS" value="1"/>
>         <parameter name="Wind_Direction" value="160"/>
>         <parameter name="Wind_Speed_KT" value="05"/>
>         <parameter name="Visibility_SM" value="3"/>
>         <parameter name="Weather" value="VCTS +RA BR"/>
>         <parameter name="Cloud_Layer_1_Type" value="OVC"/>
>         <parameter name="Cloud_Layer_1_Height_Feet" value="2600"/>
>         <parameter name="Cloud_Layer_1_Height_Meters" value="780"/>
>         <parameter name="Temperature" value="23"/>
>         <parameter name="DewPoint" value="23"/>
>         <parameter name="Inches_Altimeter" value="29.91"/>
>         <parameter name="Automatic_Report" value="AO2"/>
>         <parameter name="Hourly_Precipitation" value="0.06"/>
>         <parameter name="Plain_Language_remarks" value="LTG DSNT SW AND
> W"/>
> </station>
> <station name="KDNV">
>         <parameter name="Date" value="2005-12-23T12:15:00"/>
>         <parameter name="Report" value="KDNV 231215Z AUTO 04006KT 5SM BR
> CLR 23/21 A2991 RMK AO2"/>
>         <parameter name="Report_Type" value="METAR"/>
>         <parameter name="AUTOS" value="1"/>
>         <parameter name="Wind_Direction" value="040"/>
>         <parameter name="Wind_Speed_KT" value="06"/>
>         <parameter name="Visibility_SM" value="5"/>
>         <parameter name="Weather" value="BR"/>
>         <parameter name="Cloud_Type" value="1"/>
>         <parameter name="Temperature" value="23"/>
>         <parameter name="DewPoint" value="21"/>
>         <parameter name="Inches_Altimeter" value="29.91"/>
>         <parameter name="Automatic_Report" value="AO2"/>
> </station>
> </reports>
>
> > In this case, XML is the clear choice over BUFR for our needs.
> > Human-readability is VERY important to our user base.  Based on what
> > I've been hearing anecdotally, it doesn't sound like everyone is fully
> > in favor of using BUFR.  It will be very interesting to see where this
> > goes.  NetCDF, BUFR, HDF, GRB, and others are each popular in certain
> > areas.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Aaron
> >
> > Robb Kambic wrote:
> > > Aaron,
> > >
> > > Before i add my opinion, where is the WMO standard for METAR XML
> > > located? i was aware proposals but nothing definite.  also i heard WMO
> > > was considering bufr to distribute the data.
> > >
> > > robb...
> > >
> > > On Tue, 20 Dec 2005, Aaron Braeckel wrote:
> > >>Has anyone come across any XML standards for decoded METARs, TAFs,
> > >>PIREPs, or AIR/SIGMETs?  Do you know of anyone who might have come
> > >>across them?  I am trying to standardize our format and I am looking
> > >> for options.  I am aware of the WMO standard for METAR XML, but I am
> > >> not completely comfortable with it.  It seems a bit difficult to work
> > >> with, and in this case our data is getting distributed outside the
> > >>organization so clarity is important.
> > >>
> > >>Thanks,
> > >>Aaron Braeckel
> > >>RAL
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>Java-dev mailing list
> > >>address@hidden
> > >>http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/java-dev
> > >
> > > =======================================================================
> > >======== Robb Kambic                                  Unidata Program 
> > >Center
> > > Software Engineer III                        Univ. Corp for Atmospheric 
> > > Research
> > > address@hidden               WWW: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/
> > > =======================================================================
> > >========
>
> ===========================================================================
>==== Robb Kambic                                  Unidata Program Center
> Software Engineer III                    Univ. Corp for Atmospheric Research
> address@hidden                   WWW: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/
> ===========================================================================
>====


NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available through the web. If you do not want to have your interactions made available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.