1 / 17

The NASA Standards Process Group

The NASA Standards Process Group. Richard Ullman, NASA. Technology Diffusion. Time. 100%. Source: Geoffrey Moore, Crossing the Chasm, 1999 modified after Everett Rodgers, 1962. Adoption. 0%. Innovators Early Early Late Laggards Adoptors Majority Majority.

carys
Download Presentation

The NASA Standards Process Group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The NASA Standards Process Group Richard Ullman, NASA

  2. Technology Diffusion Time 100% Source: Geoffrey Moore, Crossing the Chasm, 1999modified after Everett Rodgers, 1962 Adoption 0% Innovators Early Early Late Laggards Adoptors Majority Majority Innovative Pragmatic Technology Demonstration Mission Reliability/Stability NASA’s Chasm NASA ESDSWG November 2011

  3. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 Standards Diffusion • Chasm between: • early adopter - technology for strategic advantage • early majority - pragmatic focus. • A practical path across chasm … “Community-led” • successful practice in specific community • broader community adoption • community-recognized “standards” • Community-led relies on: • trusted endorsements • strong leadership • “whole product”

  4. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 ESDS Standards Process – Seeking Pragmatic Recommendations • A specification or practice is recommended as a standard … Only after practices have been shown to: • (1) have demonstrated implementation and • (2) benefit to operation will they be endorsed for preferential use. • Ideas come from innovators or mission planners and are tempered by the significant demands of writing an RFC. • Review process permits adoption only after “significant” community endorsement. • THE RFC PROCESS PROVIDES PRAGMATIC REFERENCES

  5. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 Crossing our Chasm – ESDS and the Pragmatic Decadal Survey • SPG has been successful as a pragmatic voice: NASA HQ has endorsed SPG recommendations for Decadal Survey Mission use. Mission planners have embraced SPG as subject matter experts. • NASA HQ recognize the benefit of choosing standards that are already recommended by the community • The frustrating thing about standards from a HQ perspective is that everyone seems to want a different one. • Program-focused HQ planners want agency investments to have broad return. i.e, for data: effective use for the primary mission and multiple secondary uses • Decadal survey mission planners recognize the benefit of choosing standards that are already recommended by NASA. • The frustrating thing about standards from a mission is that there are so many to choose from. • Mission-focused pragmatic planners want to make the right choice. Standards that work and standards that won’t get them in hot water with their stakeholders.

  6. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 Crossing our Chasm – ESDS and Innovative Technologists • It is a challenge to encourage technology demonstration projects to use RFC process. • Technologist are often more interested in the technology puzzle rather than in practical dissemination. • Early adopters are often more interested in strategic advantage rather than wide use. • System Engineering focused on mission requirements makes “outreach” of writing RFC for community good “out of scope” • “Whole Product” may be missing. • Considerable systems engineering is still required when abstract standard is to be embedded into a mission implementation.

  7. TWG • Review Questions: • Technical Specification • Operational Readiness • Suitability for Use Process Diagram • Initial Screening • Initial review of the RFC • Provide RFC submission support • Form TWG; set schedule RFC SPG Proposed Standard Technical Note Reject Community Review Stakeholders Evaluate Proposed Standard TWG Evaluate Proposed Standard Implementations and Community Response SPG Recommendation Reject Technical Note Recommended Standard NASA ESDSWG November 2011

  8. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 Process Basics • 3 types of reviews and all reviews can be done simultaneously – some reviewers perform multiple reviews. • Technical specification review • Usefulness for purpose review • Operational readiness • If the proposed standard has been adopted by an another standards organization, then do not need a technical specification review • For a mature defacto standard, we will perform a subset of the three types of reviews. May not need an operational readiness review or usefulness for purpose review • The SPG will determine which reviews will be conducted for each proposed candidate standard. Can be a subset. • Encourage strong community leader – essential to the process

  9. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 Responsibilities • Community Leader • Identify someone in their community who will document standard according to SPG guidelines. • Work with the community to get an extended review of the proposed standard. • SPG • Assign “RFC editor” to advise on RFC document. • Publish and publicize RFC • Assign “TWG”, technical working group to organize community review and evaluate responses. • Recommend action to NASA ESDIS Project

  10. Endorsed Standards and Tech Notes Standards Technical Notes OGC Web Map Service V1.3 AURA Guidelines Backtrack Orbit Search Algorithm Interoperability Between OGC CS/W and WCS Protocols Lessons Learned Regarding WCS Server Deisgn and Implementation Creating File Format Guidelines: The Aura Experience ECHO Metadata Updates to GCMD DIF Mapping HDF5 to DAP2 • Data Access Protocol (DAP) V2.0 • OGC Web Map Service V 1.1.1 • HDF 5 • HDF EOS 5 • NetCDF Classic • GCMD DIF • ICARTT • CF Metadata Conventions • NetCDF-4/HDF5 File Format NASA ESDSWG November 2011

  11. July SPG Workshop at ESIP Federation • Annual technical workshop at the ESIP Federation summer meeting • Chance to recruit new members from the ESIP Federation • Share information about NASA SPG endorsed standards and Technical Notes • Delve into technical topics • Summer workshop agenda included presentations and discussions about • Data Quality Framework • Data Quality Basics • Integrated Multi-project Visualization using Data Casting • UUIDs • Coherent Web • WCS • Reference Architecture immersive workshop

  12. Reference Architecture Document At the July 2010 SPG workshop, discussion about a need for a Reference Architecture document. New missions and new data systems would use the reference architecture to identify what capabilities are needed, identify areas or standardization, and also discuss the evolution of their system. Writing Team is headed by Michael Burnett and includes Barry Weiss and Emily Law. At the July 2011 SPG workshop, the Ref Architecture Writing team reviewed the different views of the Reference Architecture and led the attendees in an immersive exercise taking a close look at the “Actors” and the different architectural “views”. Attendees provided many comments about the Reference Architecture document. .

  13. Monthly Telecon Discussions • RFCs being reviewed • Initial Review comments from SPG members • Initiate Technical WGs with SPG volunteers • TWG conducts public review of the RFCs • Discuss TWG recommendation for RFC (SWAL) • Discuss specific standards or best practices that need RFCs • How to facilitate the submission of particular RFC • Status of the Reference Architecture document progress • Status and News from New Missions (SMAP, IceSAT2, IceBridge,..) • Tech Happenings – share information about new/old technical “stuff” by attendeesin areas where standardization is needed. Some of the tech happenings will be tracked for future RFCs. • Planning for 2 SPG meetings per year (ESIP Fed, ESDSWG) • SPG Website transition to Coherent Web • New members are welcome!

  14. Wanted: Near Term & Long Term Future RFCs • OGC CSW (ISO) • OpenSearch • OGC WCS • Metadata standards (e.g. ISO 19115,…) • Data Quality Best Practices • Data Quality Rubrics • Provenance & Lineage • Visualization standards (e.g. KML,..) • Interface standards (e.g. DAP v4, …) • Data modeling • Data Fusion • Web Services (e.g. REST, SOAP, ..)

  15. SPG WG Sessions This Week WG session 1 Tues 3:40-5:30pm Discussion: steps to actively implement new working group structure and goals – Richard Ullman WG session2 Wed 8:30 – 10:35am • Implementation of the Lineage Model – Yuanzheng Shao • Provenance Collection and Display Tools for the AMSR-E SIPS – Helen Conover • Provenance Services for Tracking Production of Multi-Sensor Merged Climate Data Records – Hook Hua • Geoscience Data Curation Using a Digital Object Model and Open-Source Frameworks: Provenance Applications: Jerry Pan • Provenance-enabled Automatic Data Publication– Peter Slaughter

  16. SPG WG Sessions (cont) WG session 3 Wed 10:50-12:15pm • • MENDS & ISO study – SiriJodhaKhalsa • • Next steps for NASA ISO after MENDS – Ted Habermann • • Practical Application of the OpenSearch Convention to Earth Science Data Discovery - Chris Lynnes WG session 4 Wed 3:50-5:30 • • Measuring the Quality of Satellite Remote Sensing Data: Update on Efforts with QA4EO– Ross Bagwell • • Remote Sensing Level 2+ data quality issues and challenges – Greg Leptoukh • •Reference Architecture – Michael Burnett WG session 5 Thurs 8:30-9:30am • SPG Working Group Business session – Richard Ullman

  17. NASA ESDSWG November 2011 After the Poster Session: JOIN US FOR MUSIC NIGHTWEDNESDAY details TBD

More Related