1 / 20

Are Standards Really Standards Any More?

In response to Wyn Cudlip with regards to an IDN profile of ISO 19115 …. Are Standards Really Standards Any More?. M élanie F. Meaux NASA / GCMD. Questions …. What is a standard? Why should standards be used? What really makes a standard a standard? What are the standards?

wynn
Download Presentation

Are Standards Really Standards Any More?

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. In response to Wyn Cudlip with regards to an IDN profile of ISO 19115 … Are Standards Really Standards Any More? Mélanie F. Meaux NASA / GCMD

  2. Questions … • What is a standard? • Why should standards be used? • What really makes a standard a standard? • What are the standards? • What are the common metadata standards? • Are profiles impacting interoperability? • How can communities achieve maximum interoperability?

  3. Just what is a standard? “A standard is simply a common set of terms and definitions that are presented in a structured format.” Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC)

  4. Why should standards be used? • Data Discovery • Data Interoperability / Exchange • Data Access / Re-Use • Data Intercomparison …and saves time and money !

  5. Why bother with a standard if, • “Field choices are not always consistent and enforced (i.e date formats)” • “[Standard is already complex enough, but] it does not appropriately handle information specific to my dataset” • “The metadata structure does not easily handle non-static data sets” • “The technical terms and document language are difficult to read and understand” • “[The standard is too complex:] you have to wade through too much to get to what actually applies to a particular dataset” • “[Because of standard complexity,] attention to format can overtake attention to actual content” • “The final product is not easily understandable to the general public” NOAA Coastal Services Center

  6. What really makes a standard a standard? • Endorsed by a recognized organization • Easily Available • Well documented (to prevent inconsistent use of the standard) • Widely used • Flexible / Evolving • Easily adoptable (to allow maximum compatibility with existing standards) • Guidelines for content change

  7. What are the standards? • Data (HDF, NetCDF, ASCII) • Metadata • Format (ISO 8601 Date/Time) • Controlled Vocabularies / Ontology (RDF) • W3C Mark-up Languages (XML, HTML, XSLT) • Data Exchange Protocols (HTTP, FTP) • Metadata Exchange Protocols (OAI) • Web Services Protocols (OGC, SOAP)

  8. What are the standards? • Data (HDF, NetCDF, ASCII) • Metadata • Format (ISO 8601 Date/Time) • Controlled Vocabularies / Ontology (RDF) • W3C Mark-up Languages (XML, HTML, XSLT) • Data Exchange Protocols (HTTP, FTP) • Metadata Exchange Protocols (OAI) • Web Services Protocols (OGC, SOAP)

  9. What are some of the common metadata standards? • 1960: ROSCOP/CSR (Cruise Summary Report) • 1970: MARC (Machine-Readable Cataloging) • 1986: Australia New Zealand Land Information Council (ANZLIC) • 1988: Directory Interchange Format (DIF) • 1991: European Directory of Marine Environmental Datasets (EDMED) • 1994: Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) • 1994: US Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM) • 1998: Common Data Index (CDI) • 2001: NOAA/NODC Electronic Data Description Format (EDDF) • 2004: ISO-19115 Geographic Information Metadata International Standard

  10. What are some of the common metadata standards? • 1960: ROSCOP/CSR (Cruise Summary Report) • 1970: MARC (Machine-Readable Cataloging) • 1986: Australia New Zealand Land Information Council (ANZLIC) • 1988: Directory Interchange Format (DIF) • 1991: European Directory of Marine Environmental Datasets (EDMED) • 1994: Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) • 1994:US Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM) • 1998: Common Data Index (CDI) • 2001: NOAA/NODC Electronic Data Description Format (EDDF) • 2004:ISO-19115 Geographic Information Metadata International Standard formalized

  11. Profiles of FGDC CSDGM • 1999: Biological Data Profile of the CSDGM • 2001: ESRI Data Profile of the CSDGM • 2001: Shoreline Data Profile of the CSDGM • 2002: Extensions for Remote Sensing of the CSDGCM http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/

  12. Draft Profiles of ISO 19115 • Imagery and Gridded Data Extension (ISO 19115-2) • WMO Core Metadata Standard • Marine Community Profile (AODC) • Australian Government’s Office of Spatial Data Management (OSDM) Profile • North American Profile for Geospatial Metadata (NAP) • US National Profile • Canada Profile • ESRI Profile • Biological Data Profile (NBII) Extension • CEOS IDN Community Profile of ISO 19115

  13. Are profiles impacting interoperability? “Profiles consist of a selected set of metadata elements. Additional metadata elements and conditionality changes can be established.” Source: ISO 19115:2003, Geographic Information - Metadata

  14. Are profiles impacting interoperability? StandardProfile Broader/complex Narrower/simpler Generic Specific Core Elements Core Elements Optional Fields Mandatory Fields Undefined Domains Explicit domains – extended codelists

  15. Are profiles impacting interoperability? • Many profiles – how many is too many? • Draft ISO 19139 XML schema available at http://eden.ign.fr/xsd/isotc211 (no official schema at this time) • Many interpretations of standard • By definition an extended document cannot conform to the ISO19139 schema! • Sharing outside your community becomes a challenge…

  16. How can communities achieve maximum interoperability? • Specific core elements and formats (i.e. ISO 8601: YYYY-MM-DD) need to be followed • Quality control of metadata is crucial - without validated metadata, meaningful comparisons cannot be made and may result in misrepresentation of the data • Tools are needed to assist with the creation of metadata record – to assure compliance • Not just implementation, but conformance!

  17. What tools are available? • SMMS (Spatial Metadata Management System) • TKME / MP (Metadata Parser) • ESRI FGDC / ISO metadata editor • INTA ISO Metadata editor • IODE/MEDI • DocBUILDER (HTML / Standalone) • MATT (Metadata AuThoring Tool)

  18. What are some common controlled vocabularies for datasets? • BODC Parameter Discovery & Usage Vocabulary • Global Change Master Directory Keywords • CF Standard Names • AGU Index Terms • IOOS Core Variables • JGOFS Flux Study Parameters • U.S. GLOBEC Thesaurus • OBIS Taxonomic Categories

  19. Controlled vocabularies - Achieving maximum semantic interoperability • Guidelines & Rules for Additions, Deletions, and Modifications • Notification services for updates • Clear definitions of terms • Tools and domain experts are needed to do the vocabulary mappings - work effort is huge to fully deliver interoperability! • Long-term commitment to vocabularies and ontology maintenance

  20. Questions ? Mélanie F. Meaux mmeaux@gcmd.nasa.gov NASA / GCMD

More Related