Difference between revisions of "Geodata Committee Meeting 20060329"

From OSGeo
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 61: Line 61:
 
* Agreed that any services or data hosted by the foundation should be discoverable with OGC protocols.
 
* Agreed that any services or data hosted by the foundation should be discoverable with OGC protocols.
 
* Some discussion of division of labor: metadata for the [[Geodata Discovery Working Group|Discovery group]], hosting for the [[Geodata Packaging Working Group|Packaging group]]. Debate over whether it makes sense to keep them separate or not. Agreed that the two groups can fold together if it turns out to be necessary.
 
* Some discussion of division of labor: metadata for the [[Geodata Discovery Working Group|Discovery group]], hosting for the [[Geodata Packaging Working Group|Packaging group]]. Debate over whether it makes sense to keep them separate or not. Agreed that the two groups can fold together if it turns out to be necessary.
* Discussion of [http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/ FGDC metadata standards], and applicability outside the US.
+
* Discussion of [http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/ FGDC metadata standards], and applicability outside the US. Recommended we consider FGDC compatibility.
 
* Recommended we come up with a draft proposal for what makes OSGeo-hosted data "metadata-complete" and then begin implementing it.
 
* Recommended we come up with a draft proposal for what makes OSGeo-hosted data "metadata-complete" and then begin implementing it.
  

Revision as of 07:47, 29 March 2006

Public Geospatial Data Committee Meeting 2006-Mar-29

Meeting Info

 Chair: Jo Walsh
 Minutes: Schuyler Erle
 IRC: #osgeo channel on irc.freenode.org
 Date: 2006-Mar-29 (at least in the Americas and Europe)
 Time: Wednesday March 29, 15:00 UTC

Agenda Items

Old Business

New Items

Minutes

Attendance

Perry Nacionales, David Bitner, Norman Vine, Frank Warmerdam, Steve Coast, Jeff McKenna, Jo Walsh, Schuyler Erle, Florian Kindl, Daniel Putler, Mikel Maron, Daniel Brookshier

Old Business

Noted that three working groups came out of the previous meeting: geodata discovery, packaging, licensing. Participants are encouraged to sign up for the working groups. Agreed that working groups should set meeting times via the geodata@geodata.osgeo.org mailing list.

Project Portal

  • Project portal lives at http://geodata.osgeo.org/, currently just a first draft. The committee votes to add a screenshot or two.
  • Some discussion of whether to keep the portal page or move everything to the wiki. Agreed that we need a single clean URL to hand people. Also agreed that standards for public presentation of committees are somewhat unclear.
  • Resolved that we should pile content into the project wiki page, which will then be ported into the portal's SVN next week. Jo volunteers to share SVN access with any committee member who wants to help maintain the portal site.

Geodata Hosting

  • John Graham and Norman Vine have volunteered to provide hosting for geodata download and (possibly?) services at the San Diego Supercomputing Center. John is already hosting LandSat and Blue Marble there.
  • Recommended we put together a "one-stop" catalog for public geodata access.
  • Discussion of whether to provide download or OGC-compliant web services. Agreed we ultimately want to provide both.
  • List of data sets added to Geodata Discovery Working Group page.
  • Markus recommends setting up a ticket tracker to submit geodata sources to.
  • Some discussion of distributed WMS tiling. Agreed that this is a thing that some of us want to work on.

Metadata Standards

  • Agreed that any services or data hosted by the foundation should be discoverable with OGC protocols.
  • Some discussion of division of labor: metadata for the Discovery group, hosting for the Packaging group. Debate over whether it makes sense to keep them separate or not. Agreed that the two groups can fold together if it turns out to be necessary.
  • Discussion of FGDC metadata standards, and applicability outside the US. Recommended we consider FGDC compatibility.
  • Recommended we come up with a draft proposal for what makes OSGeo-hosted data "metadata-complete" and then begin implementing it.

INSPIRE Directive Discussion

Next Meeting

Back to the Main Geodata Committee Page