OGC - Interagency Ocean Observation Committee (IOOC)

®

®

Starting an OGC

Interoperability Experiment (IE)

Nadine Alameh, Ph.D.

Executive Director, Interoperability Program

nalameh@opengeospatial.org



February 27, 2013

NOAA, Silver Spring, MD

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC

®

Outline

•
References


•
Clearing up the confusion

–
Experiment vs. Pilot


•
Interoperability Experiment Lifecycle

–
With examples


•
General Policies


•
Questions

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

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



Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

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

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC

®

Outline

•
References


•
Clearing up the confusion

–
Experiment vs. Pilot


•
Interoperability Experiment Lifecycle

–
With examples


•
Questions

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

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

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC

®

OGC Interoperability Program

Interoperability

Experiment

Plugfest

OGC Network

Pilot

Specifications

Implementations

Demonstrations

Types of Interoperability Program Initiatives

Testbed

Specification

Program

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

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)

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

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


Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC

®

Outline

•
References


•
Clearing up the confusion

–
Experiment vs. Pilot


•
Interoperability Experiment Lifecycle

–
With examples


•
Questions

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC

®

Interoperability
Experiment (IE)
Life Cycle

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

11

IE Startup

Package

OAB

Review

Letters of

Participation

Intent

Startup

Preparation

Kickoff

Initiator

Agreement(s)

Participant

Agreement(s)

Execution

Wrap
-
up &

Reporting

Draft IE

Reports

IE

Reports

OGC

®

IE Step 1

Startup Package Submitted to OAB for approval

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

12

IE Startup

Package

OAB

Review

•
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?

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

•
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



Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

14

OGC

®

IE Step
2:

Startup Preparation

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

15

IE Startup

Package

OAB

Review

Letters of

Participation

Intent

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.


Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

16

OGC

®

IE Step
3:

Kickoff

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

17

IE Startup

Package

OAB

Review

Letters of

Participation

Intent

Startup

Preparation

Kickoff

Initiator

Agreement(s)

Participant

Agreement(s)

•
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.


Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

18

OGC

®

IE Step
4:

Execution

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

19

IE Startup

Package

OAB

Review

Letters of

Participation

Intent

Startup

Preparation

Kickoff

Initiator

Agreement(s)

Participant

Agreement(s)

Execution

Draft IE

Reports

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.

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

20

OGC

®

IE Step
5:

Wrap
-
up and Reporting

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

21

IE Startup

Package

OAB

Review

Letters of

Participation

Intent

Startup

Preparation

Kickoff

Initiator

Agreement(s)

Participant

Agreement(s)

Execution

Wrap
-
up &

Reporting

Draft IE

Reports

IE

Reports

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.


Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

22

OGC

®

Outline

•
References


•
Clearing up the confusion

–
Experiment vs. Pilot


•
Interoperability Experiment Lifecycle

–
With examples


•
General Policies


•
Questions

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

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

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

24

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.

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

25

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.

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

26

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.


Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

27

OGC

®

Outline

•
References


•
Clearing up the confusion

–
Experiment vs. Pilot


•
Interoperability Experiment Lifecycle

–
With examples


•
General Policies


•
Questions

–
nalameh@opengeospatial.org

Copyright © 2013 Open Geospatial Consortium

®

®

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
Translato
r

WFS

(GTRI)

Consuming Desktop
Application

WMS

Consuming 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

Copyright © 2010 Open Geospatial Consortium

3D Portrayal Interoperability Experiment

Update

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

•
Aims

1.
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 Answer

1.
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?

Copyright © 2010 Open Geospatial Consortium

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.

Copyright © 2010 Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC

®

IE General Architecture


Copyright © 2010 Open Geospatial Consortium

®

Making Location Count

Authentication Interoperability
Experiment (Auth IE)


June TC, Silver Spring, MD


Jeff Harrison

Initiative Manager, CubeWerx USA and The Carbon Project

jharrison@thecarbonproject.com
,
jharrison@cubewerx.com


© 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


•
AUTH Method

–
Overview

–
Assumptions and Interactions

–
Method for Authentication on WMS (and one Catalog)

–
TIE Results


•
AUTH Method

–
Overview

–
Assumptions and Interactions

–
Method for Authentication on WMS (and one Catalog)

–
TIE Results





Helping the World Communicate Geographically
40

OGC

®

Summary and Discussion

Helping the World Communicate Geographically
41

Authentication

Methods

Number of

Services

Implementing

Time

®

OGC Technical Committee, June 2005

GALEON

(Geo
-
interface for Air, Land, Earth,
Oceans
NetCDF
)

Interoperability Experiment

Stefano Nativi

John Caron

Lorenzo Bigagli

Ben Domenico

OGC

®

OGC Technical Committee, June 2005

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

®

OGC Technical Committee, June 2005

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

®

OGC Technical Committee, June 2005

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

®

OGC Technical Committee, June 2005

Component Diagram

UC #2, #4

Univ. Florence/IMAA

Unidata/UCAR

UC #1

Univ. Florence/IMAA

Unidata/UCAR

UC #3, #5

Unidata/UCAR

Univ. Florence/IMAA

UC #7

Univ. Bremen

UC #6

GMU

OGC

®

© 2008 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.

Helping the World Communicate Geographically
47