SIF Status to ADC/WGISS

1. SIF Status to ADC/WGISS Siri Jodha S. Khalsa Steve Browdy

2. SIF Accomplishments • Development and refinement of SIF workflow process. • Identification and deployment of open source workflow system. • Design of experts database and definition of requirements for its linkage to the workflow system. • Accepted request from GEOSec to be GEOSS interoperability “help desk”: • Worked with NASA ECHO services to have them registered properly. • Based upon discussions w/ NASA and GMU, researched and decided on terms for Standards register entry associations, based on ebRIM. • Formation of Regional Teams. • Design of SIF web presence.

3. SIF Goals 2009 • Automate workflow system interoperability with registries. • Refine process for review of standards and special interoperability arrangements. • Engage the Regional Teams • Outreach to make GEOSS users and participants more aware of the SIF’s role. • INSPIRE query regarding catalog service descriptions went to AIP • Deploy SIF web presence.

4. Registry Submission Review Process • Initial Screening • All required fields populated properly • Adherence to GEOSS Interoperability Principles • Standard is non-proprietary; • Standard is “open” meaning is that the specification is accessible by anyone. This does not preclude costs to purchase the standard; • Profiles of the standard are provided where required to make the standard specific enough for implementation; • Standard is well documented; and • Standard has support within at least one user community. • Based on the above, either the item is accepted as submitted or submitter is informed that further work is required

5. Registry Submission Review Process, p. 2 • Contributes to the overall GEOSS mission? • Suitable for wider use within GEOSS? Would wider adoption present any impediments to GEOSS objectives? • Applicable to communities or SBAs other than those identified? • Should the proposed item be showcased? • Should the contributor be made aware of other/similar standards? • Recommend that Contributor and/or contributor organisation play a bridging function between GEOSS components and Societal Benefit areas (SBAs)? • Inform contributor of complementary organisations wherewith linkages/partnerships may be established? • Relationship to entries in the Service & Component Registry, e.g. is the item referenced by many components and services; are there components and/or services in a similar domain that do not use the item?

6. Conclusion of Review Process • Outputs of the Review Process: • Recommendation in status change of item, • Feedback to contributor, • A set of proposed actions (to be ratified by SIF), • Recommendations, notifications to GEO Community, • Any additional comments for the attention of the SIF.

7. SIF Challenges • Getting a broader complement of committed volunteers. • Implementing a rating system for standards and special arrangements • Based on usage to indicate successful interoperability endeavors. • Making SIF the clearinghouse of interoperability issues for GEOSS.

8. Schedule • November 2008 • SIF workflow system operational • SIF website operational • Refinement of SIF review process • December 2008 • Engage regional teams in SIF tasks • January 2009 • Start of SIF outreach activities • February 2009 • Complete SIF review of existing registry entries • March 2009 • Automate workflow system with Standards Registry • dependent on available resources

9. IP3 Status to ADC/WGISS Siri Jodha S. Khalsa Stefano Nativi

10. Two-way discussion on interoperability in terms of GEOSS’ broad goals and practical aspects and issues exposed in AIP How IP3 Fits In Help w/ Interoperability Implementation Experience Review of Special Arrangements AIP SIF Mediation Capability Scenarios Process Refinement IP3 Registries

11. IP3 Accomplishments • Analysis of cross-discipline interoperability requirements based on 5 user scenarios • Implementation of a Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity user scenario offering • An Ecological Niche Modeling server • An Ajax based client to interface the ENM server • Access to Local, Regional and Global climate change datasets (e.g. IPCC and TOPS data) • CSW-based discovery service to GBIF Species Distribution data

12. IP3 Goals • Host, register and operate the IP3 Mediator component for AIP, including: • A community (IP3) clearinghouse Catalogue Service • Interfaces to numerous disciplinary services based upon interoperability arrangements • The IP3 Team will participate in interoperability testing of the IP3 Mediator with other registered components and services to assist in the realization of selected SBA scenarios • Develop and register model interoperability arrangements along with specific mediation solutions, advancing concept of “Model Web.”

13. Identifying Unmet Needs • IP3 will make recommendations where existing standards are not currently meeting the needs of the disciplines including • draft recommendations to appropriate standards developing organizations based upon the GEOSS "Special Arrangements“ and forward to SIF

14. IP3 Challenges • Integrating with one or more existing portals • Engage other multidisciplinary science communities • Develop cross-disciplinary use scenarios • Implement mediation services to discover and access resources based on special arrangements • Experiment process interoperability • Workflow for scientific resources registering, discovery and access • Experiment model servers interoperability • Workflow for registering, discovering and accessing model components

15. Schedule • November 2008 • New cross-disciplinary use scenarios are designed • New Model resources to be registered and interfaced are recognized • February 2009 • IP3 Clearinghouse/Mediator fully operational • Demonstration of the new cross-disciplinary use scenarios • Demonstration of the new model servers usage • Process interoperability workflow for Scientific resources is described and demonstrated. This is provided as a contribution to the GCI. • June 2009 • Additional cross-disciplinary use scenarios and mediation services

16. Thank You!

17. Interoperability Process PROCESS Information Communities 1 2 3 Earth System Science Community Distributed catalog Service Registry Component Registry International Standard / Special Interoperability Arrangement Registry

18. Model Interoperabililty Simulation models are generally built in isolation and do not easily interoperate with others Result: lost opportunities to address important questions Barriers to interoperability are both technical and cultural For IP3 we will EGU GA 4/08 # 18

19. The Model Web initiative • Improve existing models • Create new models • Increase model interoperability or Model A Model G Model B or Dataset 1 Model C Dataset 3 Portal Model D Dataset 2 Portal Model F Dataset 4 Model E Model Web Gary Geller NASA JPL California Institute of Technology April 2008

20. knowledge is as heterogeneous as human beings; thus, "mediation" is the only way to address such domain. The technocratic approach to generate a world of "standard" components which fit in perfectly seems to be utopist and limiting.