NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Whiteside, Arliss E (US SSA) <arliss.whiteside@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Jan 24, 2008 4:59 PM Subject: [WCS-1.2.swg] January 23 Teleconference Minutes To: wcs-1.2.swg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx January 23 Teleconference Attendees: (not a quorum) Arliss Whiteside, BAE Systems Wenli Yang, George Mason University Peter Baumann, Jacobs University Bremen Charles Roswell, Charles Roswell Marie-Lise Vautier, Institut Geographique National (IGN) Andrew Woolf, Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Ben Domenico, National Center for Atmospheric Research (observer) Rob Weingruber, National Center for Atmospheric Research (observer) Summary: 1) Arliss asked if any other change requests should be listed on the WCS 1.2 SWG portal at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/index.php?m=projects&a=view&project_id= 263&tab=2&artifact_id=26072? And if any other planned or possible WCS 1.2 change requests should be listed on the Twicki page at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/twiki/bin/view/WCSrwg/OtherChangeReques tsPlanned? No one present suggested any additions to these lists. Peter said he did not find the Web Coverage Processing Service (WCPS). Arliss said he would check later. (The WCPS is the next-to-last item listed on the page at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/index.php?m=projects&a=view&project_id= 263&tab=2&artifact_id=26072.) 2) We discussed the new Corrigendum 2 for WCS 1.1, as follows: a) Arliss asked if any additional changes should be considered, beyond those already considered and listed on the Twicki page at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/twiki/bin/view/WCSrwg/WCSCorrigendumTwo ? No one present suggested any more changes. b) On Steven Keens' objection to allowing listing no SupportedCRS in a CoverageDescription, Arliss said he sent Steven a draft revision of OGC 07-149r1 that requires at least one SupportedCRS to be listed in a CoverageDescription. If an unrectified offered coverage has an ImageCRS, that ImageCRS should be listed as one SupportedCRS. If an offered coverage has a GridCRS, the GridBaseCRS of that GridCRS should be listed as one SupportedCRS. When an unrectified offered coverage has an ImageCRS referenced as the GridBaseCRS of its GridCRS, that ImageCRS should be listed as one SupportedCRS. (However, that ImageCRS may not be for that unrectified offered coverage.) c) All present agreed that this seemed to be a good change. Arliss said he would ask Steven if he agrees with this change. If so, Arliss will post this revision of OGC 07-149r1. 3) We then shared information with the GALEON project, represented by Ben, Rob, Andrew, and Wenli. Much of this information was previously shared with the WCS 1.2 RWG by Peter. a) Ben said that GALEON had found few implementations of WCS 1.1 (and Catalog 2.0). They attributed this to difficulty in implementing WCS 1.1 clients. They then decided to incrementally improve existing implementations of WCS 1.0, to support additional GALEON needs. They will then share what they learn in these proven implementations with the WCS 1.2 standard working group. b) Rob said they want to share data using WCS. In addition to conventional grid coverage data, they have trajectory data. To encode some of their additional data, they will need to extend the current NetCDF format. c) Ben said that GALEON is also interested in asynchronous execution of operations, coverages with irregular grids, data from ground-based radars and sensors, and WCS harmonization with SOS and WFS. Arliss stated that other persons in the OGC are also considering such harmonization. He encouraged GALEON to share harmonization information with John Evans, who is considering some of these issues for the WCS RWG/SWG. d) Arliss suggested that GALEON provide the WCS SWG with yes/no (or high/low) interest rankings of the various extensions mentioned by Douglas Obrien in his Stresa presentation to the Coverages WG, and of the various use cases documented in WCS 1.1. (Interest rankings of the various changes being considered for WCS 1.2 would also be useful to us. The Douglas OBrien presentation is not yet posted on the OGC portal, so Arliss will ask him for it.) e) We agreed to share information with the GALEON project once a month, and tentatively agreed to again share in the teleconference on February 20. 4) Marie-Lise asked about the multilingual support planned in OWS Common 1.2. Arliss said that Peter Vretanos was also handling multilingual support for OWS Common, but had not done anything on this yet. Arliss guessed that Peter is waiting until this subject is handled for WCS, since Peter has been very busy on WFS. 5) Marie-Lise also mentioned the WSDL encoding of WCS SOAP interface. Arliss stated that a draft of the WSDL OWS-5 engineering report has been posted on pending documents. He understood that OWS-5 was having a teleconference today, in which they will decide if this document is ready for the pre-approved voting by the TC to release it as a Discussion Paper. Once that decision is made, he thinks the WCS 1.2 SWG should proceed to consider it. The next teleconference for the WCS 1.2 SWG is planned at 11:00 AM Eastern on Wednesday, January 30. This teleconference will discuss as time permits: 1) Is the new Corrigendum 2 for WCS 1.1 ready for approval? 2) Which of the listed WCS abilities should we consider moving from one extension group or the core to another? The current lists that Classify and Identify WCS Abilities are posted at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/twiki/bin/viewfile/WCSrwg/AddConformanc eClasses?rev=2;filename=Classification_of_WCS_abilities.doc and at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/twiki/bin/viewfile/WCSrwg/DivideSpecifi cationIntoBasePlusExtensions?rev=1;filename=Classification_of_WCS_abilit ies_pb_v3.rtf. 3) What is the status of dividing WCS 1.2 into parts, as discussed on the Twicki page at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/wiki/twiki/bin/view/WCSrwg/DivideSpecif icationIntoBasePlusExtensions? What are your comments on Arliss' tentative list of document parts? 4) What is the status of the WCS 1.2 RWG work items listed on the Twicki pages at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/wiki/twiki/bin/view/WCSrwg/WCS12ChangeR equests? When do you expect to be able to provide an estimate of when you will complete draft specification material? At this time, the higher priority changes seem to include (no order implied): * WSDL encoding of WCS SOAP interface * Multilingual support * Allow asynchronous GetCoverage * Conformance classes * Generalized domain * Allow GetCoverage to output one file that includes all coverage data, not multi-part MIME * Allow time-only GetCoverage requests * Support point coverages * Interpolation methods XML file improvement * Abstract Test Suite * Transaction operation extension If you cannot participate in this teleconference, please provide your inputs on the above subjects in email messages to the SWG mailing list. Arliss Whiteside
galeon archives: