- Points for group discussion raised by the last meeting?
- Other standards documents there are other items that were discussed. Do we want to include them here? What is the appropriate level of detail.
- Who are these standards for?
- In the past, we knew that people were going to make large mosaics. Is that still appropriate? For example, not a lot of detail for higher resolution data products.
- Audience:
- Data producers, data providers, users are the current listed folks.
- Who is this written to?
- One or all three? Advocate one.
- That's fine, but it means that we need to be very aware what is good for the users. Users just want this to work. They don't care about the standards, until it doesn't work.
- We can use language that the end user might not understand, but need to be quite aware of what the end user needs (would benefit from).
- For the end user, they interact with data products through the intermediaries. The client's (consumers) are important as this is where the users interact with the data products.
- Don't think so much about (just) the users, but also think about the products themselves. Either easier to create or to be used.
- This is a balancing act user needs / provider capabilities.
- Answer: Primarily, the data providers.
- Assume that one is a data provider. They have data from some source and they want to make it available. They find our standards. We need to tell them what would need to be done to integrate into the Lunar SDI ecosystem.
- What other recommendations should be made?
- Maybe the answer, at first is none. We are defining a standard. As long as the data conforms to the standard, it should be interoperable.
- Could one look at the data coming out / products needed? That is prescriptive. Is that what we are doing?
- LCDP lays out the products that are needed. That product covers that angle.
- Assumption: Others are making decisions about what to produce.
- No great standards / tools for surface data.
- Decision: Top down. Ship it.
- And see what breaks.
- Questions - if you have comments / concerns / discussion points.
- We have high level recommendations right now. As we run into issues, we can iterate.
- Are there other recommendations that are important at that time?
- Possible Future Discussion Topic: What other "recommendations" should we make beyond data interoperability stuff? Should we recommend best practices for how to work with this data once you get it? For example, there are best practices for projections and map scales, etc. This could be open-ended, as there is a whole constellation of things, but could be a good topic to discuss.
- Discussion of Strategy
- Updates on reviews / text developed for strategy documents
- Edits made.
- How do we identify data producers and engage them? How do we identify data providers and engage them?
- We can't build a list of producers / providers.
- We need to have a representative group. Standards, roadmap, etc. need to have good alignment with key players.
- We need to bootstrap an ecosystem of compliant producers / providers.
- Question - what set of people do we need to engage with to bootstrap this?
- LROC
- Can we get more direct communication with some of the NASA data groups?
- TOPS (Not a lot of planetary here)
- They have been pushing standards and tools.
- Action items / next steps?
## Notes
## Notes
-
-
## Action Items
## Action Items
-
- Draft an email to make public these standards.
- Update standards page to include contact info to weigh in.
- Build a list of persons to engage to get standards input. Also include the generic email lists.
- Email group - build a list of the key players to engage for roadmap elements.
- Ping Megan Ansdel, Becky - status of planetary standards and tools via TOPS and other efforts.
- Road Map document edits - getting sent around. Will discuss next meeting.
- Future longer-term work: It might be good to link to specific, concrete examples of a COG or a GeoPackage from the Data Format Standards page, but I'm not sure what would be the best exemplars here. (Jay)
Next Agenda:
Next Agenda:
-
- Road Map
- Action item updates
Future discussions:
- On the "Data Interoperability Standards" page, it lists the "Lunar Polar Gridded Data Record" as a thing that appears to be different from the LOLA gridded data, so I'm not sure what that is. There is also some repetition on this page that I'm not sure how to untangle (the three bullet points are kind of repeated and "proxy products" is repeated in sentences before them to make me wonder if there's a cut'n'paste error here.
