® ® Starting an OGC Interoperability Experiment (IE) Nadine Alameh, Ph.D. Executive Director,...

®®

Starting an OGC Interoperability Experiment (IE)

Nadine Alameh, Ph.D.

Executive Director, Interoperability Program

[email protected]

February 27, 2013

NOAA, Silver Spring, MD

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

mailto:[email protected]

OGC®

Outline

• References

• Clearing up the confusion– Experiment vs. Pilot

• Interoperability Experiment Lifecycle– With examples

• General Policies

• Questions


OGC®

References (1)

• OGC Interoperability Experiment Policies and Procedures– http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=32418

• Interoperability Experiment Templates and Examples– https://portal.opengeospatial.org/modules/files/details.php?m=files&artifact_id=5835

• Completed OGC IE– OGC 3D Portrayal Interoperability Experiment (2012)

• https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=49068– OWS Shibboleth Interoperability Experiment (2012)

• https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=47852– OGC Surface Water Interoperability Experiment (2012)

• https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=50166– Hydro Ground Water Interoperability Experiment (2011)

• http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=43545&version=1 • http://external.opengis.org/twiki_public/HydrologyDWG/GroundwaterInteroperabilityExperiment

– Ocean Science Interoperability Experiment Phase 1 (2011)• http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=29535

– Ocean Science Interoperability Experiment Phase II (2011)• http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=37373

– Authentication Interoperability Experiment (2011)• http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=41734• http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/initiatives/authie

– GALEON Interoperability Experiment (2005-2006)• http://www.ogcnetwork.net/galeon


http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=32418


https://portal.opengeospatial.org/modules/files/details.php?m=files&artifact_id=5835

https://portal.opengeospatial.org/modules/files/details.php?m=files&artifact_id=5835

https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=49068



http://external.opengis.org/twiki_public/HydrologyDWG/GroundwaterInteroperabilityExperiment











http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/initiatives/authie

http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/initiatives/authie

http://www.ogcnetwork.net/galeon

http://www.ogcnetwork.net/galeon

OGC®

References (2)

• Press releases– MilOps Geospatial IE (call open until March 4 2013)

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/97– Forecasting IE (ongoing)

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/1449– Ground Water IE

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/1740– 3D Portrayal IE

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/1693– Surface Water IE

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/1230– Authentication IE

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/1073– GALEON IE

• http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/428


http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/97

http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/97

http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/1449









OGC®

Outline

• References



• Questions


OGC®

6

OGC’s Approach for Advancing Interoperability

• Interoperability Program (IP) - a global, innovative, hands-on rapid prototyping and testing program designed to unite users and industry in accelerating interface development and validation, and the delivery of interoperability to the market

• Specification Development Program –Consensus standards process similar to other Industry consortia (World Wide Web Consortium, OMA etc.).

• Marketing and Communications Program – education and training, encourage take up of OGC specifications, business development, communications programs

• Compliance Testing and Certification Program - allows organizations that implement an OGC standard to test their implementations with the mandatory elements of that standard


OGC®

OGC Interoperability Program

Interoperability Experiment

Plugfest

OGC Network

Pilot

Tech

nology Matura

tion A

nd Complia

nce

Specifications

Implementations

Demonstrations

Types of Interoperability Program Initiatives

Testbed

Specification Program


OGC®

8

Types of OGC-IP Initiatives

OGC Testbed

OGC Interoperability Experiment

OGC Pilot

OGC Network

Purpose Develop new specs & refine existing specs

Refine & extend existing specs

Test existing specs in operational environment

Persistent, widespread infrastructure

Project Management

OGC IP Team OGC Members

OGC IP Team OGC Members and IP Team

Sponsorship Yes No Yes Both

Participation OGC Members

OGC Members

Members & operational partners

Members & public

The OGC Interoperability Program (OGC Document 05-127)


OGC®

Pilot vs. Interoperability Experiment (IE)

• Reasons for conducting a project as an IE:– Cost reduction; all participation is in-kind– Least external management overhead; participating organizations self-

organize – Challenge: effectively managing diverse, multi-organization, multi-national

team • Reasons for conducting a project as a Pilot:

– OGC assumes management role; issues RFP, screens responses, contracts for delivering sponsors’ stated requirements

– OGC IP staff handle all meeting & admin tasks; submit monthly reports– Project follows milestones closely; regular sponsor reporting is enforced– Requirements may include level-of-performance guidelines– Deliverables include documentation subject to peer review


OGC®

Outline

• References



• Questions


OGC®

Interoperability Experiment (IE) Life Cycle

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium 11

IE Startup Package

OABReview

Letters ofParticipationIntent

Startup Preparation

Kickoff

InitiatorAgreement(s)

ParticipantAgreement(s)

Execution Wrap-up &Reporting

Draft IEReports

IEReports

OGC®

IE Step 1Startup Package Submitted to OAB for approval


IE Startup Package

OABReview

• Approval Criteria• The IE is focused on an interoperability issue related to the OGC

Technical Baseline• The IE completion timeframe is reasonable (4-6 months)• The IE is “lightweight” – focuses on a single interoperability issue• All materials, documents, lessons learned, and other findings

developed as a result of the IE will be shared with the OGC membership

OGC®

IE Step 1:What’s the Startup Package?


• Contains Activity Plan (next slide)

• Developed and submitted by OGC member organizations– Supported by at least 3 OGC members

• At least 1 of the initiating organizations should be an OGC voting member

– Must include Letters of Support from each initiator • See references for Template for Letter of Support

• Posted for 2-week review by the OGC membership• Submitted to OGC Architecture Board (OAB) for approval

– OAB may require a service fee of US$2,000 to partially cover the costs of facilitating the IE• 2 press releases + OGC Facilitator & Tech Office staff time• Fees are waived for first 4 IE’s approved by OAB in a calendar year

– OAB provides guidance and recommendation within 3 weeks of receiving the package

OGC®

IE Step 1:What’s the Activity Plan?

• Activity Plan– Technical Objectives - and how they relate to the OGC Technical

Baseline– Technical Approach – work items to be accomplished and schedule– Technical Deliverables – a set of Engineering Reports to be developed

during the IE (details of the work done, lessons learned, conclusions and any change reports related to OGC Technical Baseline)

– Resource Plan – staffing, hardware, software, facilities, etc.– Requirements for Participation

• Resource commitment, well-defined and consistently applied– Indicate if IE is Open or Closed to non-OGC Member observers

• Examples– GALEON 2 Activity Plan– C2GIE Activity Plan


OGC®

IE Step 2:Startup Preparation


IE Startup Package

OABReview


Startup Preparation

• OGC Press Release, approved by IE submitting organizations, containing:– Summary of the Activity Plan– Requirements for Participation– Overall schedule– Kickoff meeting location and

logistics

• 30-day Participant Notification period starts after Press Release– Interested organizations submit

Letter of Participation Intent to OGC • See references for template

• By Kickoff date, all participating organizations must submit a signed Participant Agreement (see references for template)

OGC®

IE Step 2:Startup Preparation

• Initiator Agreement - Submitting organizations must sign by the Kickoff date to be considered an Initiator.

• Initiative Manager - works with OGC Staff to populate the Member Portal with information pertaining to the IE.

• Initiator and Participant organizations - must provide the Initiative Facilitator with contact information for all representatives involved in the IE.

• OGC Staff– Create OGC Web Portal accounts (and/or provide access to the project area created for the IE)

for the Initiator and Participant representatives.– Create an email reflector for the IE and populate it with Initiator and Participant representatives’

email addresses. • Initiative Manager

– Submit a Kickoff Agenda package to the Initiative Facilitator at least two (2) weeks prior to Kickoff.

• Must contain the planned items for discussion and the intended outcomes of the Kickoff.• Once the Kickoff agenda is approved, the Kickoff meeting can proceed. • If an agenda cannot be approved by one week prior to the Kickoff, then the Initiative Facilitator may

reschedule or cancel the Kickoff until an appropriate agenda is provided.


OGC®

IE Step 3:Kickoff


IE Startup Package

OABReview


Startup Preparation

Kickoff



• Virtual and/or in person as agreed to by the IE Team.

• Must follow Kickoff agenda except as modified by the consensus of the Initiators and Participants.

• Initiative Manager must provide updated schedule to Initiative Facilitator within 2 days of kickoff completion.

• Observers are not entitled to attend the kickoff, unless specific permission is agreed by the IE Initiators.

OGC®

IE Observers

• Any OGC member in good standing has right to sign up to be an observer, using (click-through) OGC Observer Agreement– http://portal.opengeospatial.org/?m=public&orderby=default&tab=7

• See IE P&P for guidance on non-OGC Member Observers, and Observer caveats (access and interaction rules)

• IE Initiators Please Note: An email conversation would need to switch to the OGC email list when any standards related IPR related issue is raised, when internal OGC process questions are raised, and when internal OGC related business must be discussed. – If you have any questions about this caveat, please contact the OGC staff.


http://portal.opengeospatial.org/?m=public&orderby=default&tab=7

OGC®

IE Step 4:Execution


IE Startup Package

OABReview


Startup Preparation

Kickoff



Execution

Draft IEReports

OGC®

IE Step 4:Execution

• Execution of the IE is considered to have begun at the Kickoff meeting.

• All work items must have a well-defined scope, a schedule for completion, and must be assigned to an individual (not just an organization).

• Work items must be completed on schedule and to the satisfaction of the Initiative Manager and the Initiative Technical Lead. – Failure to complete assigned or agreed work items on time and in a

satisfactory form may result in the decision to revoke Participant (or Initiator) status or in the reassignment of the work item to another individual.


OGC®

IE Step 5:Wrap-up and Reporting


IE Startup Package

OABReview


Startup Preparation

Kickoff



Execution Wrap-up &Reporting

Draft IEReports

IEReports

OGC®

IE Step 5:Wrap-up and Reporting

• This phase includes the final drafting of technical deliverables and may also include demonstrations and other activities.

• The Initiative Technical Lead and the Initiative Manager must approve final drafts of all deliverables including Engineering Reports.

• The Initiative Facilitator shall adjudicate all disagreements concerning the finalization of deliverables.

• All Engineering Reports (ERs) will be posted to the OGC Pending Documents list for consideration during the subsequent Technical Committee meeting.

• A final press release will be created summarizing the results of the IE, crafted by the IE Team with support from the OGC Communications Team.


OGC®

Outline

• References




• Questions


OGC®

OGC Web Portal and Twiki

• Share project-related files

• Schedule all teleconferences and other project-related events with the OGC portal calendar

• Use the IE email reflector for all managerial and project coordination messages

• During Execution, the Initiative Manager provides the Initiative Facilitator with status by ensuring that the OGC Web Portal is kept up-to-date


OGC®

Responsibilities

• The Initiative Manager is the responsible individual for management issues and therefore is empowered to make management decisions.

• The Initiative Technical Lead is the responsible individual for resolving technical issues and therefore is empowered to make technical decisions.

• Disagreements that cannot be resolved by the IE team should be brought to the attention of the Initiative Facilitator, who may choose to make a decision or may choose to forward the issue to the Review Board. – In the former case, Participants may appeal the decision to the Review

Board. In the latter case, the decision is final.


OGC®

Non-Disclosure

• Non-disclosure is an important issue that must be taken seriously by all Initiators, Participants, and Observers.

• All information generated and shared within an IE must remain confidential unless otherwise agreed by the Initiators and the OGC.

• The details of the non-disclosure policy are documented in the Initiator, Participant, and Observer Agreements.

• Draft Engineering Reports (ERs) and final Engineering Reports (ERs) from the IE shall be treated as member-privileged information and are not be released outside of the membership unless – the release of said reports is approved by OGC Staff, or – the document is made public by a motion and vote of the OGC Technical

and Planning Committees.


OGC®

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

• OGC has adopted an Intellectual Property Rights Policy in order to minimize the possibility of inadvertent infringement of the IPR of Members and third parties using or implementing any OGC Standards. – http://www.opengeospatial.org/about/ipr – http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=32268

• All participants in the IE shall observe this policy and related Policies and Procedures documents.


http://www.opengeospatial.org/about/ipr


OGC®

Outline

• References




• Questions– [email protected]


®®

Backup Slides

© 2012 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC Interoperability Experiment

Frank Klucznik

Georgia Tech Research Institute

January 2013

OGC®

Use Cases

• Extract content from a MilOps conformant IEP and transform it into an existing OGC standard (e.g., GML, KML, etc.) without losing precision or accuracy.

• Extract content from a MilOps conformant IEP and transform it into an existing OGC standard (e.g., GML, KML, etc.), and display the data in an OGC conformant mapping tool without losing precision or accuracy.

• Evaluate the use of GML in NGA’s Time Space Position Information (TSPI) specification in a MilOps conformant exchange (e.g., IES/IEP).

• Accomplish the experiment with commodity skills such as java, general programming, XML, XSLT, etc. (e.g., no specialty skills required).

31

OGC®

Primary Experiments

• Experiment #1: Extract Information Exchange Package (e.g., XML instance document) content including geospatial data that includes GML and transform it into an OGC Standard format (e.g., KML, WMS, WCS, WFS, etc.) with symbology as appropriate, and then plot it on a map.

• Experiment #2: Extract geospatial data that includes GML content and add additional MilOps metadata (e.g., MilOps content specified as a feature) and then plot it on a map.

• Experiment #3: Expose MilOps data through a Web Feature Services interface and make content available in GML and/or KML. Vendor client tools will consume this content and display it on a map. Demonstrate no loss of precision when transforming embedded GML content (e.g., location).

• Experiment #4: Employ “GML Validator” currently being developed in OWS-9 to determine compliance of GML in a MilOps exchange to GML Encoding Specifications, if appropriate.

32

33

Experiment

NOTE: Dark blue colored artifacts provided by GTRI, brick colored artifacts provided by vendor participants

MilOps IEP

GTRI IEP Translat

or

WFS(GTRI)

Consuming Desktop

Application

WMSConsuming

Desktop Application

Geospatial Server

Client 1

Client 2

Client n

Low Bandwidth Client (e.g., mobile app)Low Bandwidth Client (e.g., mobile app)Low Bandwidth Client

(e.g., mobile app)

…

Transmitter to tactical

device

Consuming Desktop

Application

Consuming Desktop

Application

Consuming Desktop

Application

Consuming Desktop

Application

Vendor IEP

Translator

Data Source

Implementation Options

®

Making Location Count


3D Portrayal Interoperability ExperimentUpdate

75th OGC Technical Committee

Sydney, Australia

Scott Simmons, Benjamin Hagedorn, Arne Schilling

December 1st, 2010

Sponsored by

Hosted at The University of Sydney

OGC®

IE Overview

• Aims1. Advance developments of Web 3D Service (W3DS) and Web View Service (WVS)

candidate specifications.

2. Test the applicability of various 3D portrayal approaches for various client platforms.

3. Test the compatibility of 3D portrayal based on W3DS and WVS with standards-based data formats and services, including, e.g., CityGML and WFS.

4. Lower the barriers for the implementation, integration, and usage of 3D portrayal capabilities.

• Questions to Answer1. Can the draft service candidates of WVS and W3DS adequately support the web-

based management, analysis, and exploration of environmental and urban 3D geodata?

2. What are best practices to use, combine, and integrate the various OGC specifications and draft OGC specifications for 3D data formats and 3D data services for providing web-based 3D portrayal capabilities for various client configurations?


OGC®

IE Experiments

• IE Experiments (primary)1. Prepare urban and/or environmental geospatial data for service-based 3D

portrayal and set up W3DS and WVS servers.

2. Integrate 3D data from various 3D portrayal services (W3DS servers and/or WVS servers) on the visualization level.

3. Access a W3DS from various clients (including lightweight, web-based, and mobile clients), retrieve various formats (X3D, KML, COLLADA), and display the virtual 3D world.

4. Access a WVS from various clients including lightweight, web-based, and mobile clients and display the virtual 3D world.

5. Demonstrate how to select and style the relevant data, how to retrieve feature information, and how to spatially analyze the displayed 3D worlds, as well as how to interactively control the virtual camera within the displayed virtual 3D worlds for these client configurations.

6. Use 3D portrayal clients as a starting point for changing underlying feature data.


OGC®

IE General Architecture


®

Making Location Count

Authentication Interoperability Experiment (Auth IE)

June TC, Silver Spring, MD

Jeff HarrisonInitiative Manager, CubeWerx USA and The Carbon Project

[email protected], [email protected]

© 2010 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.



OGC®

Initiative Overview

• Various ways identity information can be transferred from OGC client to OGC service by leveraging the underlying transport protocols.

• Both HTTP and SOAP offer native support for embedding security information and there are several main-stream authentication protocols that leverage these features.

• By embedding the identity information in the transfer protocol the OGC service specifications are not touched at all, so the existing level of interoperability not altered in any way.

• This Interoperability Experiment tested different standard ways of transferring identity information by means of embedding this information in the transport protocol.

Helping the World Communicate Geographically 39

OGC®

Use Cases and ER Format

• AUTH Method– Overview– Assumptions and Interactions– Method for Authentication on WMS (and one Catalog)– TIE Results




OGC®

Summary and Discussion


Authentication MethodsNumber of

Services Implementing

Time

HTTP Interface WmsConnectorSAML WMS Server

I. AuthenticationMapping Container

Security Management System

(e.g. DB)

Key value pairs of user account parameters

Create Assertion

Deny

OR

Permit

Cache Encrypted Artefact

Return Artefact String

User Validation Query

Return exception message

®

OGC Technical Committee, June 2005

GALEON(Geo-interface for Air, Land, Earth, Oceans

NetCDF)Interoperability Experiment

Stefano NativiJohn Caron

Lorenzo BigagliBen Domenico

OGC®


Main Interface Objectives

• Evaluate effectiveness of ncML-GML in WCS data encoding… suggest extensions

• Evaluate netCDF/OPeNDAP as WCS data transport (encoding) mechanism … suggest extension if warranted

• Investigate protocol adequacy for serving and interacting with (5D) datasets involving multiple parameters (e.g., temperature, pressure, wind speed and direction) in three spatial dimensions with two temporal (actual time, forecast time) dimensions

OGC®


Ancillary but Related Goals

• Develop and evaluate gateway implementation(s) for serving datasets from currently operating THREDDS/OPeNDAP/netCDF servers

• Experiment with both database and gateway server implementations

OGC®


GALEON Use Cases

1. Return a WCS getCapabilities response based on THREDDS inventory list catalogs

2. Return a WCS describeCoverage response based on THREDDS inventory list catalogs

3. Return 5D datasets, encoded in geoTIFF, as getCoverage response

4. Return 5D datasets, encoded in ncML-GML, as getCoverage response

5. Return 5D datasets, encoded in netCDF, as getCoverage response

6. WCS client able to access, analyze, and display full 5D datasets in netCDF form

7. WCS database server for 5D datasets

OGC®


Component Diagram

U ser In terfa ce M ed ia tion D a ta Access

W C S4

TH R E D D S

T HR E D D S/

O P eN D AP

W C S4

ras dam anras dam an

W C Sc lie nt

getC ap ab ilities

W C S4

nc M L -G M L

T HR E D D S/

O P eN D APne tC D F2

nc M L -G F ileS er v er

W C S4

ge o TIFFT HR E D D S

/O P eN D AP

ne tC D Fdatas e t

F ileS er v er

W C S4

ne tC D F

ne tC D F2

ge o TIFF

d es c rib eC o veragegetC o verage

getC o verage

W C Ste s t c l ie nt

fo r nc M L -G

T HR E D D S/

O P eN D AP

UC #2, #4Univ. Florence/IMAA

Unidata/UCAR

UC #1Univ. Florence/IMAA

Unidata/UCAR

UC #3, #5Unidata/UCAR

Univ. Florence/IMAA

UC #7Univ. Bremen

UC #6GMU

OGC®

© 2008 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.


Date post:	01-Apr-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	daniela-toops
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times