Upload
kamal
View
53
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The NASA Standards Process for Earth Science Data Systems. Richard Ullman, NASA Yonsook Enloe , SGT Inc IGARSS 2010. Technology Diffusion. Time. 100%. Source: Geoffrey Moore, Crossing the Chasm, 1999 modified after Everett Rodgers, 1962. Adoption. 0%. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The NASA Standards Process for Earth Science Data Systems
Richard Ullman, NASAYonsook Enloe, SGT IncIGARSS 2010
Technology Diffusion
2NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
100%
0%
Adop
tion
Time
Source: Geoffrey Moore, Crossing the Chasm, 1999modified after Everett Rodgers, 1962
Innovative PragmaticTechnology Demonstration Mission Reliability/Stability
Innovators Early Early Late Laggards Adoptors Majority Majority
NA
SA’
s C
hasm
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”
3NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
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
4NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Crossing our Chasm – ESDS and the Pragmatic Decadal SurveySPG 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.
5NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Decadal Survey [2]
SPG process has engendered:• Greater confidence that mission products will be interoperable
with heritage and current NASA data holdings• Stakeholder community benefits because their preferences
and opinions are available to the mission planner• Lower barriers to entry and use of NASA data by external
discipline communities within NASA and outside NASA because community standards are used.
NASA Earth Science Data Systems Program is actively evolving the Earth Science data “system of systems” architecture for the Decadal Survey missions and beyond
6NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Tier 1 Decadal Survey Missions
Tier 1 Decadal Survey missions are the first group of missions to be formulated since NASA chartered the SPGSoil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) MissionIce, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite 2 (ICESat 2)Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO)Deformation, Ecosystem Structure, and Dynamics of Ice (DESDynI)
The Tier 1 missions are actively working with the SPG in order to explicitly assure that the mission data systems solutions draw on the consensus-built lessons of agency experience. Tier 1 missions have a level 1 requirement to use SPG-endorsed standards
7NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Crossing our Chasm – ESDS and Innovative TechnologistsIt 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.
8NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
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 reviewFor 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 reviewThe 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
9NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
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 HQ.
10NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Endorsed Standards and Tech Notes
StandardsData Access Protocol (DAP) V2.0 OGC Web Map Service V 1.1.1HDF 5HDF EOS 5NetCDF ClassicGCMD DIFICARTT
Technical NotesOGC Web Map Service V1.3AURA GuidelinesBacktrack Orbit Search AlgorithmInteroperability Between OGC CS/W and WCS ProtocolsLessons Learned Regarding WCS Server Deisgn and ImplementationCreating File Format Guidelines: The Aura Experience
11NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Near Term & Long Term Future RFCs
RFCs Under ReviewCF Metadata ConventionsECHO Metadata ModelMapping HDF5 to DAP2NetCDF-4/HDF5 File Format
Tech Areas for Future RFCsWeb Services (e.g. REST, SOAP, ..)Catalog services (e.g. OGC CSW,…)Metadata standards (e.g. ISO 19115,…)Visualization standards (e.g. KML,..)File Formats (e.g. NetCDF4,..)Interface standards (e.g. DAP v4, …)Data modeling Data Fusion
12NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
BACK-UP
13NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Decadal Survey Background
• At NASA’s request, the National Research Council (NRC) looks out ten or more years into the future and prioritize research areas, observations, and notional missions to make those observations
• NRC completed its first decadal survey for Earth science in Jan 2007 at the request of NASA, NOAA, and USGS.
• For the next decade, the decadal survey identified 15 missions for NASA and 3 for NOAA including 1 joint NASA/NOAA
• The 17 total (NASA & NOAA) missions are presented as the result of prioritization methodology designed to achieve a robust, integrated program.
• The 15 missions for NASA are presented in 3 time-phased blocks.
• The 17 missions form a minimal, yet robust, observation component of an Earth information system that is capable of addressing a broad range of societal need.
14NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
Process Diagram
15
Proposed Standard
Community Review
Recommendation
SPGEvaluate Proposed
Standard Implementations and Community Response
TWGEvaluate Proposed Standard
Stakeholders
Initial Screening Initial review of the RFCProvide RFC submission support Form TWG; set schedule
Recommended Standard
RFC
Review Questions:• Technical Specification• Operational Readiness• Suitability for Use
TWG
Technical Note
Technical Note
Reject
Reject
NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
SPG
NASA ESDS RFC List
ESDS-RFC Title Rev Class Status
ESDS-RFC-001 Charter of the ESDS Standards Process Group 2 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-002 The ESDS Standards Process 2 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-003 Instructions to Authors 2 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-004 The Data Access Protocol -- DAP 2.0 1.1 Standard Final
ESDS-RFC-005 OpenGIS ® Web Map Service Version 1.3 1 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-006 OpenGIS ® Web Map Service Version 1.1.1 1 Standard Final
ESDS-RFC-007 HDF 5 1 Standard Final
ESDS-RFC-008 HDF EOS 5 1 Standard Final
ESDS-RFC-009 Aura Guidelines Technical Note 1 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-010 Backtrack Orbit Search 1 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-011 NetCDF Classic 1 Standard Final
ESDS-RFC-012 GCMD Directory Interchange Format (DIF) 1 Standard Final
16NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010
NASA ESDS RFC List
ESDS-RFC Title Rev Class Status
ESDS-RFC-013 GCMD Service Entry Resource Format (SERF) 0.1 Standard Proposed
ESDS-RFC-014 Interoperability between OGC CS/W and WCS Protocols 0.1 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-015 Provenance within Data Interoperability Standards .01 Note Proposed
ESDS-RFC-016 Lessons Learned Regarding WCS Design and Implementation 0.1 Standard Final
ESDS-RFC-017 Mapping HDF5 to DAP2 0.1 Note Proposed
ESDS-RFC-018 Creating File Format Guidelines - The Aura Experience 0.1 Note Final
ESDS-RFC-019 ICARTT 0.1 Standard Proposed
ESDS-RFC-020
ECHO Metadata Standard 0.1 Standard Proposed
ESDS-RFC-021 CF Metadata Conventions 0.1 Standard Proposed
ESDS-RFC-022 NetCDF-4/HDF-5 File Format RFC 0.1 Standard Proposed
17NASA Earth Science Data Systems Standards - IGARSS - August, 2010