SAWG MTG Minutes 2010-03-12

From NGDC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

In Attendance

  • Dan Kowal
  • Anna Milan
  • Phil Jones
  • Tess Brandon
  • Jeremy Throwe

Metadata in CLASS

  • Anna brought up the issue that the DMSP metadata in CLASS is at too high a level and needs to be broken into five - six more granular records by data type.
  • Anna highlighted the aggregation inormation identifiers as a strategy for linking all of these records as one family. SBUV was shown as an example.
  • Phil identified two issues: 1) We need more metadata for describing each data type; 2) Need an approach for organizing in CLASS.
  • Jeremy explained that there's an evolving process in CLASS though CLASS SE (System Evolution?) for upgrading the CLASS interface. He added that any effort that effects the presentaoin layer of data families has to take into account the collection-level metadata.
  • Anna recommended that the CLASS SE group touch base with the data center metadata reps for input.
  • Jeremy suggested to identify what are the possible solutions, which ones are the easiest to implement and that Anna contact Shelly Briscoe.
  • Anna discussed how the legacy data sets are the most difficult to manage especially as contacts retire or move on. She highlighted NODC as a good example for how they are managing the Jason data sets.

CLASS Transition Process

  • Dan discussed a CLASS Candidates template he put together for review and use by the data centers.
  • Jeremy inquired about requirements gathering process and to involve CLASS early on in the process. As an example, the candidates template is currently being vetted by the ClASS requirements team. Requirements gathering is of great interest across the board (COWG).
  • Tess clarified that the soon-to-be-hired CLASS requirements person will only focus on NODC candidates for CLASS and not focus on any data stewardship needs for all of the data centers as part of the transition process.


  • Jeremy advised not to draw too many conclusions on needing to re-shape the SA template structure because of complexity of the GOES-R SA. Treat it as an exception (remember that filling out the CDRL with Harris leading the effort is part of a CDRL) as the template handles smaller campaigns quite well.
  • Tess clarified and advocated to Harris that the NODC data set of interest will be lumped into the eventual NCDC SA. Some additional information can be added to the SIP description tables to highlight the association between this specific data set being stewarded by NODC. There will be an NGDC SA as well for space weather data.
  • Discussed issues regarding Ref IDs, Risk section. Phil suggested that we might consider beefing up the directions in some places, but Jeremy offered that "directions" only go so far. It's a template after all that must be flexible.
  • Phil delivered a more complete set of algorithm metadata prior to the meeting.


  • Phil mentioned recent contact from Ken Ward of NOS for NCCOS(?) data. Will advise to make request to NODC.
  • Tracking web app was mentioned at the COWG who is looking forward to a demo at the upcoming CLASS Developers Workshop. Security testing will occur next week.

Next Meeting

  • April 16, 2010.