Difference between revisions of "SAWG MTG Minutes 2012-09-14"

From NGDC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: ==In Attendance== *Phil Jones *Heather Brown *Anna Milan *Greg Foti *Scott McCormick *Dan Kowal ==Roundtable== * NGDC (Current Data Calls) ** Draft Review of NOAA Environmental Data Manag...)
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 17:40, 14 September 2012

In Attendance

  • Phil Jones
  • Heather Brown
  • Anna Milan
  • Greg Foti
  • Scott McCormick
  • Dan Kowal


  • NGDC (Current Data Calls)
    • Draft Review of NOAA Environmental Data Management Framework, due 9/21. Dan to send emails, copies to NCDC and Scott.
    • Data.gov Tool Metadata. Submissions due 9/14. Dan to forward on information to NCDC.
    • Anna (Metadata): Working a lot with data providers on submitting ISO metadata; working with data managers on FGDC to ISO conversions. Working on the GOES-R Search & Access Requirements review/update for CLASS.
  • NCDC:
    • Inquired about the ISO to DIF transform, if Anna has done any work on it. Anna has not finished it. Phil working with CWCK Group who are using DIF and GCMD to get data out of CLASS. Phil will review any work she does on it.
    • Working on a lot of submission agreements.
    • Convening a group to better define the data life cycle process.
    • Putting together a procedure; will conduct a pilot. One of the gaps is the Archival Approval Process.
    • Working to improve coordination with stakeholders on appraisal teams, steps to get achival requests approved and documented.
    • Developing a Criteria Checklist that maps to the Appraisal Questionnaire.
    • Goal is to complement current process with a little more formalization.
  • CLASS.
    • Working on Common Ingest planning, defining which fields are required, which are optional for ingest. Also planning for the mechanism for getting this DI to CLASS. Evaluating impacts on Search and Access and Reporting schemes. Want to develop a basic interface description document that works for any provider - one common interface that defines it all. Scott is the POC for the CI work.
    • Phil: Jay is pushing to be compatible with NASA's ECHO. NCDC considering putting DI in ECHO named elements for CLASS. ECHO has talked about moving to ISO for granule/collection metadata. Scott thinks it's very ambitious to transition to an ECHO format and trying to meet the 2015 migration milestone. There are concerns with gathering geospatial information in a consistent way with this format.

ATRAC, How to find status on projects

  • SPIWG complained this week that they are having trouble finding the status of projects especially the state of an existing ROM estimate from CLASS.
  • Group discussed how the ROM could be another task that's added and status tracked just like the other task. The issue is we don't know what the state is with CLASS. Talked about a CLASS rep. having access to write to the project and update the status.
  • Scott said the ROM goes to Kern, and that's the last he knows about it. Dan talked about getting a revised estimate for VIPIR, given that costs could be cheaper, but has not heard back from Kern. Would that be expensive? Scott says "No." Especially, now with CI on the table as a path forward, the costs could actually become cheaper (on the CLASS side).
  • Phil: This is only way to scale it (using the CI process). Design info has to be communicated ASAP. Dan gave the budget scenario that may waylay migration for next year.
  • Back on track... Need some information placed in the Archive Decision fields to help understand where the project stands in ATRAC.
  • Phil will present to the SPIWG in a few weeks to hopefully clarify how the reports can be filtered that might show how projects are prioritized. Dan explained to also show them how some existing archive projects are undergoing submission agreement review, so it looks as though we haven't started the ingest process yet - need to make them aware of that field.
  • Phil and Ken Roberts developed a requirements spreadsheet for next releases and will add Dan's latest one about locking the form down when someone is editing it to avoid collisions.
  • NODC. Dan said one thing communicated by the SPIWG is that they don't know where things stand with CLASS projects stewarded by them. Dan explained that by not using ATRAC as a common tool, it makes it harder to show status prospective providers need. He suggested that maybe ATRAC could be used at a high level of documenting tasks, decisions and leaving their SIF to be the place to capture all of the details about a project.

CLASS Slide on GOES-R Assumptions about what's needed to begin Design for Search and Access

  • Dan will follow-up with Phil to work out to review all of the bullet points.
  • Phill will submit comments to Dan on Monday. There are still some TBDs that we dont' know about yet to confirm the assumptions.