NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Hi Ben, This is very interesting. My view is that "blessing" CF-NetCDF as an OGC standard would encourage uptake of the format in other communities, which would in itself help with our interoperability goals, irrespective if which web services we might choose to use. I haven't thought through all the implications but this gets my vote as an important point for discussion. Cheers, Jon On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Ben Domenico <Ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > At the US IOOS (Intgrated Oceans Observing System) DMAC (Data Management and > Communications Subsystem) Steering Team meetings last week, a topic with > important GALEON implications came up. Please note up front that this is > all very tentative at the moment and very much in the "investigation" stage. > But, with the next OGC Technical Committee meeting coming up in June, we > should begin considering the pros and cons and other implications. > David Arctur of the OGC suggested that we submit the CF-netCDF directly as > an OGC standard. As I understood his suggestion, the general idea would be > that CF and netCDF would be for binary data what GML and XML is for text > data. To me this was a very innovative (if not radical) suggestion and > questions arise whether this would involve the file format, the API, ncML, > ncML-GML, CSML and possibly other facets related to CF-netCDF. In spite of > the question marks, I think this is really worth some careful thought. > Since the concept was so new to me, I asked David if there were any > precedents that might serve as a template for how we might proceed. In > response, he sent a list (appended below without any implied endorsement) > which includes specification examples for file formats and for the APIs. > Fascinating idea. > . > -- Ben > ============================================= > Geographic Objects (GO-1) - this is a fine-grained API pushed by a federal > agency, very little uptake, but it's an API that became an OGC standard. > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/go > KML 2.2 - see what they did. > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/kml > Simple Feature Access, Part 1: Common Architecture - this is an interface > with different platform-specific encodings (COM, CORBA) and SQL access (see > next two references for the most used platforms) > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/sfa > Simple Feature Access, Part 2: SQL Option > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/sfs > Simple Features for OLE/COM > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/sfo > OGC Reference Model (ORM) -- this is the roadmap for OGC standards evolution > and maturation; in your proposal for CF/netCDF describe how it fits in the > roadmap. > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/orm (pdf & doc downloads from this > page) > Best Practices - index page (includes next two references below) > http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/bp > Binary XML (BXML) Encoding Specification, OGC 03-002r9 (Craig Bruce, > CubeWerx) > http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=13636 > Specification Best Practices, OGC 06-135r1 (Carl Reed) - This document > describes a variety of Best Practices and Specification development guidance > that the Members have discussed and approved over the years. These Best > Practices have not been captured in other formal OGC documents other than > meeting notes. > http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=17566 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > galeon mailing list > galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > For list information, to unsubscribe, visit: > http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/ > -- Dr Jon Blower Technical Director, Reading e-Science Centre Environmental Systems Science Centre University of Reading Harry Pitt Building, 3 Earley Gate Reading RG6 6AL. UK Tel: +44 (0)118 378 5213 Fax: +44 (0)118 378 6413 j.d.blower@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.nerc-essc.ac.uk/People/Staff/Blower_J.htm
galeon archives: