FGDC Standards Program Presented by Julie Binder Maitra To ISO Standards in Action Workshop November 16, 2013 1 Topics Policies guiding FGDC standards program FGDC Participation in Non-Federal Standards Bodies Recent FGDC standards activities Update of Chapter 10 of SDI Cookbook Policies guiding FGDC standards program OMB Circular A-16 and supplemental guidance call for development of standards for NSDI data themes OMB Circular A-119 Directs Federal agencies to use “voluntary consensus standards” in lieu of government-unique standards whenever possible Directs Federal agencies to participate in voluntary consensus standards bodies Policies guiding FGDC Standards Program FGDC Policy on Recognition of Non-Federally Authored Geographic Information Standards and Specifications Although Circulars A-16 and A-119 direct the use of non-Federally developed standards, they do not define a mechanism for the identification, selection, and coordinated implementation of non- Federally developed standards. The FGDC Policy enables a fast track to FGDC endorsement of external standards, as standards have already been vetted through a rigorous standards development process. FGDC Participation in Non-Federal Standards Bodies International International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO Technical Committee 211 National ISO member body InterNational Committee for American National Standards Information Technology Institute (ANSI) Standards (INCITS) /JAG INCITS Technical Committee L1 MoU Are members of Federal Defense and Intelligence Communities Federal Geographic Data Geospatial Intelligence Committee (FGDC) member Working Group (GWG) agencies Are members of Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Recent FGDC standards activities In 2010, the FGDC endorsed 64 Non-Federally Authored Geospatial Standards, in support of the Geospatial Platform. Standards included: De facto standards Standards developed through voluntary consensus standards bodies such as ANSI, ISO, and OGC. The steps toward FGDC endorsement were in accordance with the FGDC Policy on Recognition of Non-Federally Authored Geographic Information Standards and Specifications. See http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/fgdc-endorsed-external- standards/index_html Recent FGDC standards activities FGDC recently endorsed the following standards: FGDC Wetlands Classification Standard, Edition 2 Time Space Position Information (TSPI) Version 2.0 standard Geopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes (GENC) Standard Edition 1: U.S. Government Profile of ISO 3166 OGC® WaterML 2.0: Part 1- Timeseries Encoding Standard ISO 19156:2011, Geographic information - Observations & Measurements Pending FGDC endorsement: Web Feature Service 2.0 U.S. Government Real Property Asset Data Standard Recent FGDC standards activities, continued Upcoming Proposals to endorse: GeoRSS Simple, GeoRSS GML ISO/IEC 15144-1:2004 Corrigenda 1:2007/2:2008 JPEG 2000 Aeronautical Information Exchange Model (AIXM) 5.1 Proposal to withdraw Spatial Data Transfer Standard (SDTS) Update of standards tracking spreadsheet: covers around 150 FGDC, ANSI/INCITS, ISO, OGC, and other standards Update of Chapter 10 of SDI Cookbook Chapter 10: Standards Suites for Spatial Data Infrastructure, http://www.gsdidocs.org/GSDIWiki/index.php/Chapter_10 Topics SDI standards baseline Request for input Update of Chapter 10 of SDI Cookbook From Table 2: SDI standards baseline, http://www.gsdidocs.org/GSDIWiki/index.php/Chapter_10#Table_2:_SDI_standards_baseline SDI Core Standards Future SDI standards OGC Web Map Service 1.3 OGC Web Coverage Service 2.0, corrigenda, OGC Web Feature Service 2.0/ISO 19142:2010 and KVP, XML/POST, XML/SOAP, and GeoTIFF OGC Filter Encoding 1.1 extensions OGC Web Coverage Service 1.1.2 OGC GML 3.3 OGC Geography Markup Language 3.2.1 OGC Filter Encoding 2.0 OGC Catalogue Service 2.0.2 HTTP protocol binding (CS-W) OGC Catalogue Service 2.0.2 HTTP protocol binding (CS-W) ebRIM and ISO Profiles ISO 19115:2003 and ISO/TS 19139:2007 OGC KML 2.2 OGC WPS 1.0 + corrigenda GeoRSS-Simple, GeoRSS GML SDI supplemental standards OGC Styled Layer Descriptor 1.1 OGC Web Map Context 1.1/Corrigendum 1 Update of Chapter 10 of SDI Cookbook Request for review and comment: updates, additions, deletions, etc. Request for input from regional/national bodies to build table showing which standards in the SDI baseline that they use. Questions & Answers/Discussion Contact Julie Binder Maitra FGDC Standards Program Manager Phone:+1-703-648-4627 (-5 h UTC/GMT) Email: jmaitra@usgs.gov Web: www.fgdc.gov/standards Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/juliebindermaitra/ .
The Companion Guide: Achieving an NGDA Baseline Standards Inventory A Baseline Assessment to Meet Geospatial Data Act, Federal Data Strategy, and Other Requirements Federal Geographic Data Committee August 31, 2020 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Approach ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Outcomes ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 How to Use this Document ........................................................................................................................... 2 Geospatial Data and Metadata Standards .................................................................................................... 3 Data Standards Categories ............................................................................................................................ 5 Data Content Standards Category Definitions .......................................................................................... 5 Data Exchange Standards Definitions ....................................................................................................... 8 Metadata Standards Categories ..................................................................................................................
A Pilot for Testing the OGC Web Services Integration of Water-Related Information and Models
RiBaSE: A Pilot for Testing the OGC Web Services Integration of Water-related Information and Models Lluís Pesquer Mayos, Simon Jirka, Grumets Research Group CREAF 52°North Initiative for Geospatial Open Source Software Edicifi C, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona GmbH 08193 Bellaterra, Spain 48155 Münster, Germany l.pesquer@creaf.uab.cat s.jirka@52north.org Christoph Stasch, Joan Masó Pau, Grumets Research Group CREAF 52°North Initiative for Geospatial Open Source Software Edicifi C, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona GmbH Bellaterra, Spain 48155 Münster, Germany joan.maso@uab.es c.stasch@52north.org David Arctur, Center for Research in Water Resources, University of Texas at Austin 10100 Burnet Rd Bldg 119, Austin, TX USA david.arctur@utexas.edu Abstract—The design of an interoperability experiment to The OGC is an international industry consortium of demonstrate how current ICT-based tools and water data can companies, government agencies and universities participating work in combination with geospatial web services is presented. in a consensus process to develop publicly available interface This solution is being tested in three transboundary river basins: standards. Some successful examples of OGC standards for Scheldt, Maritsa and Severn. The purpose of this experiment is to general spatial purposes are, for example, the Web Map assess the effectiveness of OGC standards for describing status Service (WMS) for providing interoperable pictorial maps and dynamics of surface water in river basins, to demonstrate over the web and the Keyhole Markup Language (KML) as a their applicability and finally to increase awareness of emerging data format for virtual globes. On the other hand, hydrological standards as WaterML 2.0.
Metadata and Data Standards. Sharing Data in Hydrology: Best PracCes
Metadata and Data Standards. Sharing Data in Hydrology: Best Prac8ces Ilya Zaslavsky San Diego Supercomputer Center LMI Workshop, Hanoi, August 18-22 / With several slides from last week’s HDWG workshop, presented By HDWG memBers Irina Dornblut, Paul Sheahan, and others/ Outline • Why use standards? • Open Geospaal ConsorFum, and spaal data standards • Standards for water data, and the OGC/WMO Hydrology Domain Working Group – history, acFviFes, WMO connecFon, workshop last week – Suite of water data standards • WaterML 2.0 in detail (opFonal) • Assessing compliance, and the CINERGI project (opFonal) Why sharing data in LMI? • Several countries rely on the Mekong But data sharing is complicated Challenges: Habitat alteraon PolluFon Extreme weather events Over-exploitaon of resources Diseases and invasive species Poverty and social instability . Water - our most valuable asset But ... • In many places we can’t assess – How much we have – Where it is – Who owns it – What it is fit for – How much we will have – Where it will Be • We certainly can’t yet share informaon in a useful Fmeframe – In parFcular given the complexity of water cycle Why is it important to coordinate? • The orBiter was taken within 57 km of the surface where it likely disintegrated Why? • The flight system so[ware used metric units (Newtons); so[ware on the ground used the Imperial system (pound-force, or lbf) A common situaon in hydrology… Hydro Jack Need flow data! Don Hmm mayBe Don can help… *RING RING* To: Jack Hmm, I’ve got one site. I’ll 01/02/09, 3.2, 3, 1 Hi Don, I need some send it through… 01/02/09, 3.1, 3, 1 *RING RING* upper Derwent flow 10 minutes… readings for my 10 minutes… Ok.
Augmenting Hydrologic Information Systems with Streaming Water Resource Data
AUGMENTING HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS WITH STREAMING WATER RESOURCE DATA S. Esswein1, J. Hallstrom2, C. J. Post1, D. White3, G. Eidson4 AUTHORS: Forestry and Natural Resources1; School of Computing2; Computing and Information Technology3; Restoration Institute4, Clemson University, Clemson, SC USA 29634 REFERENCE: Proceedings of the 2010 South Carolina Water Resources Conference, held October 13-14, 2010, at the Columbia Metropolitan Convention Center. examined with an emphasis on design decisions regarding Abstract. Access to timely and accurate hydrological leveraging available standards and software. Insight and environmental observation data is a crucial aspect of garnered from several years of data acquisition experience an integrated approach to water resources management. is provided, along with a recent case study involving a This presentation describes an end-to-end system designed monitoring deployment supporting the Sand River to support realtime monitoring and management of water Headwaters Green Infrastructure project located in the resources. The main components of the hardware/software City of Aiken, South Carolina. infrastructure of this system are broken into four There are four components or tiers of a realtime- categories and briefly described. This organization monitoring infrastructure: (i) sensing platforms collect in provides the basis for a synthesis of several prominent situ observation data, (ii) communication and uplink standards and software solutions relevant to the technologies transmit realtime observation data, (iii) data hydrologic and environmental observing communities. streaming middleware provides highly distributed These standards are described in the context of their role publication and subscription of observation data, and (iv) in our end-to-end system. The presentation concludes with back-end repository and presentation services provide a a case study describing a green infrastructure monitoring means of viewing and utilizing data products.
A Web Services Based Water Data Sharing Approach Using Open Geospatial Consortium Standards Technology Methods Rohit Khattar1, Daniel P
Open Water Journal – Volume 6, Issue 1, Article 2 A Web Services Based Water Data Sharing Approach using Open Geospatial Consortium Standards Technology Methods Rohit Khattar1, Daniel P. Ames2 1Civil and Environmental Engineering, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602, rohit@byu.edu 2Civil and Environmental Engineering, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602 Abstract The Sharing of water data across disparate computer hardware and software platforms is facilitated by the Consortium of Universities for the Advancement of Hydrologic Science, Inc. (CUAHSI) Hydrological Information System (HIS) and similar open and closed source systems. CUAHSI’s WaterOneFlow (WoF) and WaterML 1.1 web services and data encoding standard have become widely recognized and implemented. This growth in demand for and use of standards for water data sharing has prompted the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), a major international standards setting organization, to promulgate a more widely applicable data- encoding standard called, WaterML2. This paper presents a generic OGC standards-based water data sharing approach using WaterML2 and the existing OGC standard for vector data encoding, Web Feature Service (WFS). A data sharing system built using these two standards has the benefit of being accessible by a much broader collection of software systems than previously available using WoF and WaterML1.1. The new approach requires encoding of data sites in a WFS accessible layer that includes attributes that identify a WaterML2 encoded data set available at each site. The system is prototyped in the open source HydroServer Lite data server. This service- oriented architecture completes an essential link between two major standards in geospatial and temporal data management and sharing.
OGC Environmental Data Standards for Monitoring and Mapping
OGC Environmental Data Standards for Monitoring and Mapping LANDCARE RESEARCH – Alistair Ritchie Research Data Architect/Engineer | Informatics Team MANAAKI WHENUA 2 P A G E INTRODUCTION • What is the OGC and WSMA*? • Earth science (and Agriculture) Working Groups • When one bureaucracy isn’t enough – the OGC and ISO and W3C • Overview by example – OGC Soil Data Interoperability Experiment LANDCARE RESEARCH – • Coming soon – a peak over the horizon • Why participation is valuable for New Zealand MANAAKI WHENUA * Why So Many Acronyms A p r i l 1 8 3 P A G E THE OPEN GEOSPATIAL CONSORTIUM (OGC) • ‘The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) is an international industry consortium of over 529 companies, government agencies and universities participating in a consensus process to develop publicly available interface standards.’ From: http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc • New Zealand members: LANDCARE RESEARCH – − Hawkes Bay RC, Horizons RC, Land Information NZ, Manaaki Whenua, Ministry for the Environment, NIWA • Consensus driven specification of standards for: − the behaviour and implementation of data services (interoperable communication protocols) − data formats (geography mark-up language; GeoPackage) MANAAKI WHENUA − the structure of data describing real world things (hydrological features, observation and sampling data, aviation data …) − best practices for applying and using standards − policies and tools for testing and endorsing compliance with the standards • Standardisation by innovation and doing − heavy emphasis on large scale Testbeds
Interoperable Sensor Networks 2016 National Monitoring Conference May 5, 2016 Presenter: Brandon Bergenroth (RTI) Co-authors: Dwane Young (EPA) Tad Slawecki (LimnoTech) RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute 3040 Cornwallis Road ■ Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA 27709 www.rti.org Goals • Make all sensor data (both quantity and quality) available in common formats using international standards • Identify and test data standards and approaches that would allow sensors and sensor data management software to directly publish data to the new data sharing network www.rti.org Standards http://xkcd.com www.rti.org Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) • Geography Markup Language (GML) • Observations and Measurements • SensorML • Sensor Observation Service (SOS) • WaterML • Web Map Service (WMS) • Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) www.rti.org Sampling Versus Monitoring . EPA’s data systems are well- Larger set of Metadata structured to work with discrete Describing (grab sample) data: Single . Each observation is or small associated with organization, set of project, location, method, results Small etc. amount of Metadata . Continuous data may have Describing many observations associated Many with a single metadata record. measurements www.rti.org WaterML http://waterservices.usgs.gov/nwis/iv/?sites=08313000&period=P7D&format=waterml,2.0 <om:phenomenonTime> <gml:TimePeriod gml:id="sample_time.USGS.08313000.00060.9.00000"> <gml:beginPosition>2016-04-21T12:30:00-06:00</gml:beginPosition> <gml:endPosition>2016-04-28T12:00:00-06:00</gml:endPosition>