Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of OWSSoftwareCollaborations/KickOffMeeting


Ignore:
Timestamp:
29/11/06 13:56:05 (13 years ago)
Author:
astephen
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • OWSSoftwareCollaborations/KickOffMeeting

    v1 v2  
    1  
    21== Kick Off Meeting on OWS Software Collaborations == 
    32 
     
    3029 
    3130Things that we also need to cover: 
    32 - queuing systems 
    33 - parallel systems 
    34 - animations rather than images 
     31 
     32 * queuing systems 
     33 * parallel systems 
     34 * animations rather than images 
    3535 
    36361200-1300: Where do we think we are going?  
     37 
    3738There are clearly a lot of possible futures. However, we now have enough experience to be able to guess the future. The aim of this session is to look at how we can achieve convergence in the mid to long term. Which components do we imagine will stand the test of time? 
    3839 
    39 Ag and Bryan to exit at 1300 but others welcome to carry on. 
     40Table on current Versions of OGC Specs  (is this right?) 
    4041 
    41 Table on current Versions of OGC Specs  (is this right?) 
    4242Spec    Commonly implemented    Current Draft 
    43 WFS     1.0     1.1.0 (May 2005) 
    44 + Corrigendum (Oct 2005)        1.2 (not seen)  
    45 DAQM and filter encoding 1.2 
    46 WCS     -       1.0 (August 2003) 
    47 + Corrigendum (Oct 2005)        1.1 (voting on it now) 
    48 WMS     1.1.1   1.3.0 (March 2006)  
    49 + App Profile for EO Products (July 2006) 
    50 ISO19128 standardised   ? 
     43 
     44WFS     1.0     1.1.0 (May 2005)+ Corrigendum (Oct 2005)        1.2 (not seen) DAQM and filter encoding 1.2 
     45 
     46WCS     -       1.0 (August 2003)+ Corrigendum (Oct 2005)       1.1 (voting on it now) 
     47 
     48WMS     1.1.1   1.3.0 (March 2006) + App Profile for EO Products (July 2006)ISO19128 standardised       ? 
     49 
    5150WPS             0.4.0 (Sep 2005) - DRAFT        ? 
     51 
    5252Filter Encoding         1.1.0 (May 2005)        ? 
    5353 
    5454 
    55 Geo-clients:  
    56 1. DX and GS clients: Ag intro 
    57 2. ReSC GoogleMaps/OpenLayers map portal: currently ad-hoc, moving to OpenLayers. Making back-end a WMS then front end could talk to any WMS. Plan to distribute back-end to other people, via NetCDF. 
    58 BL: How will it differ from THREDDS? 
    59 AW: THREDDS is only WCS, not WMS. 
    60 JB: Keep simple and no security etc. OpenLayers is WCS and WFS aware. 
    61 AW: WFS client is normally not aware of more than one feature. Maybe it is aware of only SimpleFeaturesProfile – doing point, line, polygon only. 
    6255 
    63 GML Application Schemas:  
    64 1. CSML (1.0/2.0): GML App Schema to define FTs for climate science data. Re-factoring to V2.0 which increases number of FTs, becomes more compatible with O&M model, defines some “operations” associated with FTs. 
    65 2. O&M: Going to be a new OGC Spec. It is an App Schema developed by OGC. It uses standard patterns for recording information from measurements and simulations etc.  
    66 3. MO App Schemas: Need to expose meteorological information. But limited to Simple  
     56== Geo-clients == 
     57  
     58 1. DX and GS clients: Ag intro 
     59 2. ReSC GoogleMaps/OpenLayers map portal: currently ad-hoc, moving to OpenLayers. Making back-end a WMS then front end could talk to any WMS. Plan to distribute back-end to other people, via NetCDF. 
     60 BL: How will it differ from THREDDS? 
     61 AW: THREDDS is only WCS, not WMS. 
     62 JB: Keep simple and no security etc. OpenLayers is WCS and WFS aware. 
     63 AW: WFS client is normally not aware of more than one feature. Maybe it is aware of only SimpleFeaturesProfile – doing point, line, polygon only. 
    6764 
    68 Services: 
     65 
     66== GML Application Schemas == 
     67  
     68 1. CSML (1.0/2.0): GML App Schema to define FTs for climate science data. Re-factoring to V2.0 which increases number of FTs, becomes more compatible with O&M model, defines some “operations” associated with FTs. 
     69 2. O&M: Going to be a new OGC Spec. It is an App Schema developed by OGC. It uses standard patterns for recording information from measurements and simulations etc.  
     70 3. MO App Schemas: Need to expose meteorological information. But limited to Simple  
     71 
     72== Services == 
     73 
    6974SOS: Will allow you to expose O&M features. 
    7075 
    71 WMS Spec:  
     76== WMS Spec == 
     77 
    7278The WMS Spec: 1.3.0 is latest. The major changes from 1.1.0 are: 
    73 •       data is a set of maps, supports time and elevation and other arbitrary dimensions. (i.e. XY x any number of other dimensions). 
    74 •       supports a number of CRSs. 
    75 •       Changed code for some projections and then swapped lat/lon. 
    76 •       a layer is now 4D – i.e. is a variable (or parameter or field) and these can be nested in layers that are essentially datasets. 
     79 
     80 * data is a set of maps, supports time and elevation and other arbitrary dimensions. (i.e. XY x any number of other dimensions). 
     81 * supports a number of CRSs. 
     82 * Changed code for some projections and then swapped lat/lon. 
     83 * a layer is now 4D – i.e. is a variable (or parameter or field) and these can be nested in layers that are essentially datasets. 
     84 
    7785Very few implementations are truly compliant with the spec. 
     86 
    7887Mpeg (i.e. animation) is valid output format. 
     88 
    7989Possible holes in spec are: 
    80 •       cannot (easily) match a range to a colourmap 
    81 •       capabilities document is monolithic: 
    82 o       layer definitions allow nesting but could expose large XML unnecessarily. 
    83 o       But GetCapabilities has a timestamp so the client can cache the returned XML and then only get new version if it has changed. 
    84  
    85 WMS Implementations: 
    86 1. GeoServer [General chat includes WCS and WFS and WMS] – heavily set up around 2D. Source is a set of features. Can render features into a map (uses simple profile?) – based on rendering features on the land surface. But GeoServer is now being re-engineered to support 4D data (relevant to WCS) and to support NetCDF inputs. Support WMS 1.1.1. 
    87 GeoServer issues: 
    88 JT: GeoServer doesn’t currently connect the Feature and Coverage support. When they re-factor they’ll put it all into supporting the general feature model. And once GeoTools has been re-factored to support the (4D) General Feature Model it should provide a harmonized view.  
    89 JB: You can plug in your own modular WCS or other into the GeoServer framework. 
    90 AW: Neil will be working on getting CSML into GeoServer. Should we plug in like JB (DEWS) or go for strategic route in core of GeoServer (or will it not be ready in time). NB has about 6 months to work on this. 
    91 Branches that we know of are: 
    92 •       WCS branch 
    93 •       Complex Feature branch (Rob Atkinson) – hacky and will die when re-factoring of GFM 
    94 •       Trunk will be re-factored but probably unlikely to be ready within next year 
     90 * cannot (easily) match a range to a colourmap 
     91 * capabilities document is monolithic: 
     92 * layer definitions allow nesting but could expose large XML unnecessarily. 
     93 * But GetCapabilities has a timestamp so the client can cache the returned XML and then only get new version if it has changed. 
    9594 
    9695 
    97 2. MapServer: Faster than GeoServer (C-based not Java), doesn’t try and be clever about Feature Model. Just creates pictures. Can compile with NetCDF libs. Slow to generate maps when high-res (GDAL issue). Hence JB developed alternative. DARC have used MapServer in their Visualisation Observatory?? GDAL is 2D limited.  
    98 3. ESSC Java-NetCDF-WMS (NcWMS): began as python on top of cdat and apache etc. Now Java NetCDF libraries worth using (instead of GADS). Hence merged to a python implementation with: 
    99 •       python to talk to CDMS 
    100 •       jython to talk to Java Web Application  
     96== WMS Implementations == 
     97 
     98'''GeoServer''' [General chat includes WCS and WFS and WMS] – heavily set up around 2D. Source is a set of features. Can render features into a map (uses simple profile?) – based on rendering features on the land surface. But GeoServer is now being re-engineered to support 4D data (relevant to WCS) and to support NetCDF inputs. Support WMS 1.1.1. 
     99 
     100'''GeoServer issues:''' 
     101 
     102JT: GeoServer doesn’t currently connect the Feature and Coverage support. When they re-factor they’ll put it all into supporting the general feature model. And once GeoTools has been re-factored to support the (4D) General Feature Model it should provide a harmonized view.  
     103 
     104JB: You can plug in your own modular WCS or other into the GeoServer framework. 
     105 
     106AW: Neil will be working on getting CSML into GeoServer. Should we plug in like JB (DEWS) or go for strategic route in core of GeoServer (or will it not be ready in time). NB has about 6 months to work on this. 
     107 
     108Branches that we know of are: 
     109 * WCS branch 
     110 * Complex Feature branch (Rob Atkinson) – hacky and will die when re-factoring of GFM 
     111 * Trunk will be re-factored but probably unlikely to be ready within next year 
     112 
     113''' MapServer ''' 
     114Faster than GeoServer (C-based not Java), doesn’t try and be clever about Feature Model. Just creates pictures. Can compile with NetCDF libs. Slow to generate maps when high-res (GDAL issue). Hence JB developed alternative. DARC have used MapServer in their Visualisation Observatory?? GDAL is 2D limited.  
     115 
     116'''ESSC NcWMS''' began as python on top of cdat and apache etc. Now Java NetCDF libraries worth using (instead of GADS). Hence merged to a python implementation with: 
     117 
     118 * python to talk to CDMS 
     119 * jython to talk to Java Web Application  
     120 
    101121I.e. one set of code with two different back-ends. 
    102 4. TPAC are implementing a WMS layer over LAS (new Java version). 
    103122 
    104 WCS Spec:  
     123'''TPAC are implementing a WMS layer over LAS (new Java version).''' 
     124 
     125== WCS Spec == 
     126 
    105127Voting on it now. 
    106128One problem is that implementations tend to be 2D focussed – until latest version gets implemented.