WP-ESIP Federation Interoperability J AMES F REW University of California, Santa Barbara frew

  • View
    214

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of WP-ESIP Federation Interoperability J AMES F REW University of California, Santa Barbara frew

  • Slide 1

WP-ESIP Federation Interoperability J AMES F REW University of California, Santa Barbara http://www.bren.ucsb.edu/~frew Slide 2 WP-ESIP Federation Interoperability Background CAN interoperability requirements Federation Interoperability Working Group (FIG) Interoperability criteria System-wide Interface Layer (SWIL) Catalog interoperability Proposed technologies Slide 3 CAN Interoperability Requirements Specific Make public-domain products available on Internet Announce products and services through GCMD Comply with Federal standards (e.g. FGDC) Philosophy Interoperability best resolved experimentally Federation must decide how much Slide 4 CAN Interoperability Requirements Process Each ESIP proposes one of {V0, ECS, CIP, FGDC GEO, custom} as System-Wide Interface Layer (SWIL) custom: permits the ESIP to be searched and queried as if it is part of a larger whole Federation determines and evolves these standards and interfaces SWIL-specific funding available Slide 5 cluster What is the SWIL? ESIP SWIL customer A common view of the Federation that all its participants agree to support Slide 6 SWIL Elements Online services How you can reach us Vocabularies and models What language(s) we speak User interfaces What we look like Slide 7 Federation Interoperability Working Group (FIG) May 1998 (1 st Federation meeting) FIG established; charged with coordinating development of SWIL Kenn Gardels elected chair Summer/Fall 1998 Inventory relevant systems, protocols, and standards, and ESIP activities Slide 8 FIG Timeline (contd) Dec 1998 (2 nd Federation meeting) Endorse layered implementation strategy metadata data functions Endorse clusters of ESIPs as bottom-up interoperability mechanism Winter/Spring 1999 FIG tiger team prepares catalog interoperability (CI) evaluation criteria April 1999: loss of Kenn Gardels; Yonsook Enloe acting chair Slide 9 FIG Timeline (contd) May 1999 (3 rd Federation meeting) CI evaluation criteria presented and approved James Frew elected chair Summer 1999 CI-level SWIL candidate systems solicited 4 proposals as of 13 Jul 1999 Evaluation team forming 30 Aug - 02 Sep 1999 FIG at UCLA: synthesize CI SWIL Slide 10 Light touch Just metadata, not data Satisfies basic requirements GCMD FGDC Satisfies query larger whole sub-requirement max(!/$): best chance to do something quickly Many existing or pending alternatives Catalog Interoperability Rationale Slide 11 Overall Criteria Allow single, multiple, or composite solutions Multiple: must be equivalent Composite: should be seamless Security and access control Expose subsets of catalog information Comply with relevant standards Discover and describe services as well as data Slide 12 Overall Criteria: Risks Maturity Acceptance By users By providers Support Technological change Continue to support obsolete technologies Migrate to newer technologies Slide 13 Catalog Interoperability Criteria Discovery / search Browse Logical data model User interface Local extensibility Technology Scalability / Bottlenecks Costs Compatibility Slide 14 Discovery Specificity Collection Granule Retrieval capabilities Ranking Relevance extent of search compliance Search capabilities Geospatial bounding-box including Z Fielded search Free text Temporal Common vs. local attributes Search Slide 15 Browse Specificity By collection E.g. coverage summaries By granule Options Static Fixed parameters On-demand User-specified parameters Vocabularies Valids / Domains Use applicable standards Inter-attribute relationships Parent-child Thesauri Other TBD Data Model Slide 16 User Interface Implementation Web browser Other clients Java app Z39.50 Internet search engines Extensibility APIs Open & complete Encodings XML Attributes Vocabularies Search capabilities Retrieval capabilities Data access Provide access to local extensions Local Extensibility Slide 17 Technology Portability Platform dependencies Implementation Language communication Persistent connections Non-standard ports and/or protocols Firewalls Number of providers Number of users Volume of data Performance Rates Latencies Asymmetric degradation Fault tolerance Scalability and Bottlenecks Slide 18 Costs plug-in Purchase Construction Configuration Administration Distribution Providers Federation Existing systems, clusters, and protocols GCMD V0 Z39.50 Compatibility Slide 19 Proposed Interoperability Technologies GCMD Mercury EOSDIS Version 0 Big Sur DIAL MOCHA Slide 20 Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Purpose Search and discovery tool for Earth science data set descriptions Metadata services: search Data services: subscription Direct links to data through alternative interfaces Z39.50 access to FGDC Clearinghouse Slide 21 Mercury Metadata Search and Data Retrieval Purpose XML Web-based system providing common view of disparate metadata and data files Metadata services: directory-level search Data services: search and access FGDC and Z39.50 compliant Slide 22 EOSDIS Version 0 Metadata Publication and Data Ordering Purpose Automated search, order, and access for online and nearline archives Metadata publication: search and access V0 protocol (PRODUCT_REQUEST message): order and access Access to local data services Slide 23 Big Sur Purpose Integrated, distributed data and metadata for search, browse, and access Metadata services: input data attributes; data history Data services: functional processing; links to visualization and access tools Accessible from platforms connected to a Big Sur database Slide 24 Data and Information Access Link (DIAL) Purpose Web-based software tools for organizing and distributing metadata Metadata services: search, query, browse, and access Data services: access and order in multiple formats Dynamic visualization, X-Y plotting, animation, subsetting, etc. Integrated with EOSDIS V0 and GCMD Slide 25 MOCHA - Middleware for Integrating Distributed Data Purpose Java architecture for integrating distributed heterogeneous data Metadata services: distributed queries using XML & RDF Data services: executes shipped code at data sources for filtering and aggregation Java middleware deploys plug & play code to data sources Use XML to exchange and interpret metadata and code Slide 26 Conclusion Bottom-up interoperability is already happening Web, clusters, etc. Federation-wide challenge: synthesize a common view Cook up a nourishing batch of SWIL without losing the flavors of each ingredient