200 likes | 332 Views
Approaches to interoperability and future aspirations. Lesley Wyborn Boyan Brodaric Harvey Thorleifson. Part 1: Approaches to Interoperability The Why and The What: Lesley Wyborn How: Boyan Brodaric Part 2 Future Aspirations: Harvey Thorleifson. Outline of session.
E N D
Approaches to interoperability and future aspirations Lesley Wyborn Boyan Brodaric Harvey Thorleifson
Part 1: Approaches to Interoperability The Why and The What: Lesley Wyborn How: Boyan Brodaric Part 2 Future Aspirations: Harvey Thorleifson Outline of session
Australian perspectives The Why: just why are we doing interoperability? The What: just exactly what is interoperability? Australian example of an interoperability test bed My role Group Leader Interoperability Geoscience Australia, Co-leader of the GeoSciML outreach group,IUGS-CGI Outline of my presentation
WHY? Don’t YOU personally hate it when………… • You want bits and pieces from different websites, CD’s and desktop files • You can’t remember which website, CD or file the information is on? • No matter how well organised your system is – when you eventually find the right website, CD or file you are not sure it is the latest version of the data? • You actually do find the bits and pieces but the formats are all different……..
Client Proprietary Software Versions of Software and then there is the bigger picture in the Australian Mining Industry and other industries……… Data Structures
Industry input to inquiry on impediments to exploration in Australia– July 2003 • Problems in gaining easy access to pre-competitive geoscience information listed as one of four major impediments to exploration • Described existing information as commonly incomplete and fragmented across eight government agencies, each with its own information management systems and structures • Noted that the disparate systems lead to inefficiencies causing higher costs, reduced effectiveness and increased risk incurred by the industry and its service providers Source: http://www.industry.gov.au/assets/documents/itrinternet/minerals_aa_finalreport_July2003.pdf
Machine People People People Information Machine The biggest why of all: the data deluge Source: http://www.dstc.edu.au/Tech_Transfer/Events/Canberra/web_services_cnb02.pdf
Just EXACTLY what are we doing? Can we learn from history?
James Watt 1776 - Invention of steam engine 1829 - Invention of railways 1834 - First rail-networks 1880 - First Standards Association for individual components 1890 - Manufacturing age 1940 - Invention of the computer 1989 - First Generation Internet 1996 - First Grid networks 1996 - First Standards for components: W3C & XML appear 2007 - OneGeology & Information Age Industrial Revolution vs the Information Revolution Peter Drucker - Beyond the Information Revolution: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99oct/9910drucker.htm XMML Data Model Simon Cox
The anatomy of the thread of a screw Standards of the industrial age were developed at the level of the lowest common component
your internal database: your storage transfer standard: an agreed schema You map word for word
An ultimate vision for the WHAT of OneGeology Through standardised interfaces OneGeology will allow usnew levels of innovation which will come from the capacity to mine vast data sets from globally distributed sources to enable the production of new geoscience knowledge to solve issues of global sustainability Geoscience Transfer Standards
The Australian Interoperability Test Bed: June 2004 Response to Minerals Exploration Action Agenda • Australian Government, State and Territory geoscience agencies, professional associations and industry to cooperatively develop and implement nation-wide protocols, standards and systemsthat provide internet-based access to, and effective storage and archiving of, industry and government exploration-relatedDATA See http://www.industry.gov.au/assets/documents/itrinternet/Road_to_Discovery20040702155050.pdf?CFID=284582&CFTOKEN=83266426
Phase 1: 2004 Geochemistry test bed: Established web services (wfs, wms) using open sourcein 3 surveys
July 14 June 22 July 21 July 28 June 15 1. Virtual expert team set up who worked with states for preliminary set up via phone and web (http://www.seegrid.csiro.au) Phase 2: 2005Technology Capacity Building 2. Expert team then visited each state for 3 days to install the technology and lecture on web services to the wider community
APPLICATIONS ReportCanberraService Desktop Map Service WA Common Interface Binding – GML/XMML QLD WFS WA WFS GA WFS TAS WFS DATA SERVICES VIC WFS NSW WFS SA WFS NT WFS DATA SOURCES Western Australia GA Tasmania Queensland Victoria NSW Nth Territory Sth Australia
Client Our demonstrator proved interoperability was feasible and what was required was that the organisation serving the data could map to an agreed standardised interface XMML+ NADM = GeoSciML
APPLICATIONS Map Service France Map ServiceCanada Landslide Modelling Tool Kit Earth-quakeRisk Tool Kit CO2 Sequest. Tool Kit 3D Modelling Tool Kit FUTURE POSSIBILITIES Common Interface Binding – GML/XMML Australian WFS French WFS Canadian WFS DATA SERVICES Swedish WFS US WFS UK WFS DATA SOURCES Australia Canada France Sweden USA United Kingdom
Infrastructure in the Industrial Age vs Information Age Narrow Standard Broad New Network Source http://www.ara.net.au/main.php#http://www.ara.net.au/main.php# http://www.railzone.org/ppt_faq/oz_rail_gauges.jpghttp://www.railzone.org/ppt_faq/oz_rail_gauges.jpg