OGC QoSE DWG Meeting OGC TC St. John's, NL, Canada 27 June 2017, 12:45 - 14:00 UTC Attendance: Buehler, Greg Kralidis, Tom Wilson, Cameron Devys, Emmanuel Tjora, Åsmund Voidrot, Marie-Francoise Vandenbroucke, Danny Rinne, Ilkka Smith, Margie Mitchell, Cindy Gordon, Michael Seifert, Markus Wright, Eric Knudson, Jaci 1. Quick status reports & issues from the work plan tasks (20 min): - OGC member survey: the most useful metrics and methods for evaluating QoS (MG) - put together Google forms survey sent to ML a few weeks back for feedback - initial feedback received from the group - next few weeks publish results to provide as finished article to wider OGC membership - invite to those to take it - survey available at https://goo.gl/forms/cWIn7Vs87vsXAsd43 - OGC Best Practice for Providing Quality of Service Metadata for OGC Web Services (extended capabilities) (IR) - created draft space in wiki for document content - goal is best practice which documents schemas and technical requirements (extended capabilities XSD) for QoS metadata within Capabilities XML (September 2017) - will not be a standard, but best practice (how to apply within existing OGC standards, guidance) - can we promote this within Testbed 14? IR will connect with Luis B - review/comments are encouraged 2. Presentation: Bringing intelligence to cataloguing – weekly web harvesting of Canadian and Arctic spatial data services; Cameron Wilson; Natural Resources Canada (20 min) CW presented Canadian work in analysing geospatial web services in Canada - no comprehensive Canadian catalogue - most catalogues have alot of data - 1691 canadian services (OGC/Esri rest in .ca) - available as JSON, XLS - updated weekly - available at http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/earth-sciences/geomatics/canadas-spatial-data-infrastructure/19359 - issues - filter mechanisms (Canadian non .ca domains) - global datasets - denial of services - quality - maintenance, volume of managing/cataloguing effort - scoring algorithms - spatial relevance - keywords - how do we find data/services for a given information community - IR: what are the key challenges that can be solved from this work? - CW: promote quality data/services to developer community - TK: global bounding box issue (default implementations) - MFV: Geospatial User Feedback standard can be valuable here - TK: making a service is the last thing on their list. Quality not a huge focus - CW: applicable role for librarians 3. Presentation: OGC Discussion Paper for Ensuring Quality of Experience of OGC Web Services; Cindy Mitchell; Natural Resources Canada (20 min + 10 min discussion) - CM presented the draft DP - drivers: lack of methods/best practices on evaluating/improving user experience via common and defined metrics - DP: CM, MG, MA, TK - next steps - ensure scope/coverage - more examples, good / poor - widening audience for broader review/feedback - propose testing and validating DP in Testbed 14 - evolve into best practices document - final version within next few months - CW: agree with next steps, could contact Arctic SDP community, strengthen machine to machine elements, clarify cartography via SLD - TK: how much can be put into machinery, "rate my service"/checker/validator type web application - MFV: licensing is a key component - TK: agree, licensing interoperability is an issue for concern (as raised in GEOSS) - IR: Symbology/Portrayal ad hoc this week at TC, may be relevant to SLD/SE discussion - TK: any feedback on causes of poor quality services (app defaults or intentional?) - is poor OWS Quality of Service based on software or server/service defaults or human decisions/intentions when configuring the service? - CM: no analysis into why - TK: could also feed into service implementations to provide better defaults or warnings 4. QoSE Common terms and concepts: presentation and approval of the initial set of terms (Tom Kralidis, 10 minutes) - presented terms and concepts drafted from May 2017 - no comments - DWG to approve initial list: https://github.com/opengeospatial/QoSE-DWG/wiki/CommonQoSETermsAndConcepts - living/working document - TK: should we validate beyond DWG? - IR: use these terms in documents, when those documents are reviewed the terms can be reviewed - TK: should we include terms in all documents? - IR: only relevant terms in the document context - TK: needs to be a vocabulary or registry per se? - IR: don't overcomplicate, keep updated list, use subset as required in documents - TK: agree, may be overkill - ACTION: TK to ask for vote/objections via ML - CM: most important terms are QoS and QoE, well covered - CW: make QoE definition apply to both human and machine to machine 5. Regular group meetings during the summer season 2017, have or skip the July & August meetings? (5 min) - July meeting is fine - August meeting will be absent membership - ACTION: TK to create Doodle pool for alternate August meeting and send to ML - important to carry momentum given TC in September