09/12/09 TC

Attendees: Rich Ullman, Yonsook Enloe, Helen Conover, Allan Doyle, Glenn Cunningham, Ananth Rao, Michael Burnett, Daniel Jacob, Siri Jodha Khalsa, John Scialdone

CLARREO Attendees: Chris Currey, Dave Young, Kam-pui Lee, Pamela

Next CLARREO/SPG Telecon: sometime in March 2010, after the CLARREO Mission Review is completed

Action Items:

• Jan 20 - Chris Currey to identify CLARREO team member who will become an SPG member
• March 1 – Rich Ullman and Chris Currey to agree on date for next CLARREO/SPG telecon to be held sometime in March.

Notes/Discussion:

• Rich explained the SPG role wrt to establishing the NASA project standards – a pragmatic solution to what standards should be recommended by NASA for use in NASA systems. This is not a top down approach with trade studies to recommend what is technically the best. This is a more pragmatic approach, exploring what is being used with NASA data. The SPG has tailored the IETF RFC process. SPG’s process explores whether the candidate standard has been implemented for operational use. Currently we have endorsed HDF5, HDF-EOS5, NetCDF Classic for file formats. We will be reviewing NetCDF4. For Metadata standards, we have endorsed the GCMD DIF. We are currently reviewing the ECHO metadata model and CF. We also use the standards process to broadcast Technical Notes. We have endorsed several technical notes wrt to OGC standards, HDF Profile for Aura, Aura experience developing the Aura Guidelines. We are expecting a technical note in the near future for a reference architecture.
• Chris Currey noted that he is interested in the reference architecture RFC – what should it be used for? This is a tool for the SPG to understand what in general a NASA science processing system looks like. Chris noted that the reference architecture RFC is a mechanism for communication. Rich noted that the decadal survey missions can use the reference architecture to scope out the work but not for design.
• For Tier 2 missions, a reference architecture would be more useful. Chris asked how detailed the reference architecture will be. Rich noted that we need to decide what level of detail is appropriate. If too detailed, then get into the implementation architecture which is not what a reference architecture should be.
• Chris asked about lessons learned from EOSDIS and past missions. This would be useful for the CLARREO team. One area of interest is data provenance – provenance model, software, and lessons learned.
• Siri Jodha Khalsa asked what it means if the NASA HQ endorses the reference architecture RFC. Rich noted that the reference architecture is likely to be a technical note, likely to be guidance.
• Chris noted that the websites for the different ESDS Working Groups are very useful.
• Chris noted that most of his work is with the production group. They will be defining the different products and analyze how they map into the different formats. The goal is to have one format for all the products if that is possible. When this work is being done, getting access to file format experts and their opinions would be very helpful.
• Pamela (standing in for John C who is at a MISR science team meeting) – noted that they are serving products in different formats including NetCDF even if they archive the products in HDF. They send the products through DAP and Giovanni.
• Dave Young, CLARREO project scientist, provided the CLARREO status. The CLARREO team is working furiously towards mission concept review which is scheduled for Feb 24th. This review is required before the KDP?? In the spring and then moving to the Phase A in the June timeframe. From the SPG, the CLARREO team needs the lessons learned on the science products inter-calibration and the machine-to-machine standards (they will develop use cases for this with Karen).
• The CLARREO team will be using ROSES to solicit members for the science definition team. Will be soliciting for users in the global climate modeling community. They are still waiting for a DAAC/data center assignment from HQ.
• The Science Definition Team will
  • Define science for the products
  • Solicit users to determine the measurements needed
• CLARREO team near term needs:
  • HDF5 vs HDF-EOS5 performance considerations
  • Any limitations on HDF-EOS5 that would limit data structures?
  • Schedule next CLARREO telecon after the mission concept review.
• Chris asked what is the difference between Reuse and Standards working groups.
• CLARREO team should identify a team member who will become a member of the SPG.
• Rich noted that the SPG does not produce or generate RFCs. The SPG maintains the process of communication with the community who will bring the RFCs in to be reviewed. We do not advocate for one standard over another.

URLs of interest:

• Base URL: http://www.esdswg.net/spg
• SPG RFC folder: http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc
• DAP-2 : http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc/ese-rfc-004/
• HDF-5 : http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc/ese-rfc-007/
• HDF-EOS 5 : http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc/ese-rfc-008/
• NetCDF Classic: http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc/esds-rfc-011/
• ECHO Metadata: http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc/esds-rfc-020/
• CF : http://www.esdswg.net/spg/rfc/esds-rfc-021/