[Foss4g2009] FW: OGC Integration Showcase - Climate Competition Proposal [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

[Bruce Bannerman]

Add the word climate in there.

I don't like the term Geospatial. It is too Cafe Late. 

(sorry, I can't get the inflection on the e in Late in text only mode).

Bruce 



On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 09:46 +1100, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Greg Buehler,
> You wanted an acronym for the Showcase.
> Simon Hope and I vote for "Geospatial Integration Challenge" or GIC.
> Assuming this acronym is available, can you please set up an OGC project 
> for us using this acronym.
> 
> Graham de Hoedt,
> Please speak up if you feel strongly that another acronym should be used.
> 
> Cameron Shorter wrote:
> > So what is this project about:
> > * OGC Standards
> > * Showcase of geospatial technologies
> > * Inclusive to all interested participants
> > * Showcase of different data
> > * A Climate Change scenario (although I'm wondering whether this scope 
> > may limit us in future if we find another sponsor who would like to 
> > add a different scenario).
> >
> > It helps if the accronym is pronounceable, ie has a vowel.
> >
> > So I suggest (in my order of preference)
> > 1. Geospatial Integration Showcase Challenge (GISC)
> > 2. Geospatial Integration Showcase for Climate Change (GISCC).
> >
> >
> > mapbutcher wrote:
> >> Bruce,
> >>
> >>     >
> >>     > We need to find a catchy name and acronym. Suggestions are 
> >> welcome.
> >>     >
> >>     > I'll start with:
> >>     >
> >>     > Climate Competition - OGC (CC-OGC)
> >>
> >>
> >> "Global Geospatial Climate Challenge" (GGCC)
> >> "Open Geospatial Climate Challenge" (OGCC)
> >> "Geospatial Technology Together"
> >>
> >> I'm not too good at this sort of thing..
> >>  
> >>
> >>
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > _Proposal_
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > The Bureau of Meteorology is prepared to contribute:
> >>     >
> >>     > - $30,000 AUD in sponsorship towards this OGC 'Integration
> >>     > Showcase' or whatever we end up calling it.
> >>     >
> >>     >   (Funding would be available next financial year).
> >>
> >>
> >> Bruce would there be any conditions on this funding?
> >>  
> >>
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > - Climate related data (preparation will be required)
> >>     >
> >>     >   + Tabular, including point data (Oracle/Postgres)
> >>     >
> >>     >   + GRID, NetCDF
> >>     >
> >>     >   + Raster satellite imagery
> >>     >
> >>     >   - We won't be able to distribute topographic data, however
> >>     > other Australian Federal
> >>     >     Government Agencies could be approached to allow this to 
> >> occur.
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > - Climate related scenario to drive a solution,e.g.:
> >>     >
> >>     >   + What were the meteorological conditions at a particular
> >>     place and
> >>     >     time or over a particular period or area?
> >>     >
> >>     >   + What are the climate characteristics of a particular
> >>     > place or region?
> >>     >
> >>     >   + How have those characteristics varied over time?
> >>     >
> >>     >   + How are they likely to vary in the future - over a
> >>     > season, from year to
> >>     >     year or decade to decade?
> >>     >
> >>     >   These may need to be fine tuned.
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > _Other Potential Sponsorship_
> >>     >
> >>     > Having a Climate Change related scenario, should reduce the
> >>     > resistance that we may encounter in encouraging organisations
> >>     > to participate.
> >>     >
> >>
> >>
> >> I think this is a good idea. This is top of the agenda and many 
> >> organisations/vendors/particpants will want to demonstrate how their 
> >> solutions can address these topical issues:
> >>
> >> How can open standards together with GIS functionality help us to:
> >>
> >> **visualise and understand the effects of climate change
> >> **address a particular climate change issue - water resources seem an 
> >> obvious and relevant local issue
> >>
> >> If BOM are stumping up funding perhaps they are well placed to lay 
> >> out some of the challenges on their agenda? i.e. what issues are they 
> >> wanting to address with geospatial technology?
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >>
> >>     >
> >>     > - Servers
> >>     >
> >>     >   + We could approach some of the big vendors and offer them
> >>     > the opportunity
> >>     >     to demonstrate the capabilities of their hardware to
> >>     > handle such an environment.
> >>     >     The vendor may even offer systems administration support.
> >>     >
> >>     > - Virtualisation
> >>     >
> >>     >   + Similarly, we could approach the large virtualisation
> >>     > vendors who would, I'm
> >>     >     sure, welcome the chance to showcase their product.
> >>     > Similarly, they would also
> >>     >     probably provide systems administration support.
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > _What do we want to see_
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > - Pilot 'Solutions' to answering climate questions using OGC
> >>     Services.
> >>     >
> >>     > - Working prototype 'Solutions' using supplied data.
> >>     >
> >>     > - Documentation describing the Technical Architecture and
> >>     > approach taken.
> >>
> >>
> >> I think it would be good to specify this further - we don't just want 
> >> a load of paper work - I'd like to see some form of 
> >> avi/presentation/slideset that talks through the architecture
> >>
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > _Constraints_
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > - The design of the solution is left to the competitor.
> >>     >
> >>     > - The Solution may be Open Source, Proprietary, or a mix of
> >>     >   Open Source and Proprietary components.
> >>     >
> >>     > - The Solution must maximise the use of OGC Services and 
> >> Standards.
> >>     >
> >>     > - The Solution must be available for further evaluation by the
> >>     OGC and
> >>     >   Bureau of Meteorology after the competition ends.
> >>     >
> >>     > - Judging is to be by a technical panel nominated by the OGC. No
> >>     >   correspondence will be entered into.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I think we'd need to deliver some criteria - i.e. points will be 
> >> allocated on the following:
> >>
> >> *Demonstration of OGC standards
> >> *Interoperability with basic technology *stack*
> >> *Innovation
> >> *Ability to demonstrate real world relevance
> >>  
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foss4g2009 mailing list
> >> Foss4g2009 at lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2009
> >>   
> >
> >
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g2009/attachments/20081114/61eedcc8/attachment.bin