Geospatial Commons Workgroup

Transcription

1 Geospatial Commons Workgroup A subgroup of the MetroGIS Technical Leadership Workgroup & MnGeo Standards Committee Agenda Thursday, September 9, :30 to 3:30 p.m. Centennial Office Building, Room Cedar Street, St. Paul, MN Welcome, Note Taker 2. Approve Agenda... all 3. Approve Meeting Summary from July... all 4. Action Items from Last Meeting... all Mark will convene a service level agreement committee. Task is to look at existing SLA and determine what is appropriate in the context of interagency GIS data services. Susanne will create a new definition and template files that incorporate MGMG options Implement version 10 of the Geoportal Extension as soon as possible Mark will set up a design team to customize the "look and feel" of the site. 5. Project Plan Update Tasks Due... Kotz 6. Design Team Recommendations... Kotz 7. Service Level Agreement for MnGeo Image Server... Cialek 8. Implementation Team Update... Imp Team 9. Service Requirements Team Update... Watson 10. Review Project Plan Next Steps... all 11. Action Items... all 12. Adjourn 1

2 Project Plan Status Task (time estimates to the right are in total person hours for task) Est Comp Done Team Preliminary functions defined and prioritized 11/13/09 Workgroup agrees to implement ESRI Geoportal Toolkit as test bed 02/04/10 Approve project charter 03/15/10 Online survey is launched 03/16/10 Create draft project plan 03/26/10 Draft project plan reviewed by workgroup 04/08/10 Research functionality and configuration options 04/29/10 Identify training needs (if any) of implementation group. 05/01/10 Project plan approved by workgroup 05/06/10 Identify a host server 05/07/10 Clarify what comprises comprehensive documentation of a web service 05/14/10 Service Reqs Develop plan for which Commons functions will be implemented in test 05/15/10 Designate how selected geoportal software & components will fit into 05/15/10 existing architecture Report on survey results to date and comparison with list of functions 05/21/10 Project plan approved by executive sponsors, owners and project manager 05/21/10 Develop a configuration plan 06/04/10 Install and/or configure hardware and firewall connections 06/11/10 Agree on a key characteristics to achieve trust in a web service 06/18/10 Service Reqs Install and configure software (including toolkit and underlying software) 06/25/10 Online survey is ended 06/30/10 Compile survey results and compare to functions list 07/09/10 Define roles of Broker (machine & human) and Provider relate to quality 07/15/10 Service Reqs of service & trust Develop a test plan, test cases, and tracability matrix 07/16/10 Imp Define options for, and recommended functions of broker and how it interfaces with service provider and the application client 08/06/10 Service Reqs Submit MetroGIS funding proposal if appropriate. Due Sept. 2 nd. 09/02/10 Implement client functions and complete UI/design work. (tasks broken down by functionality pieces eventually) 09/17/10 Individual agencies contribute resources to test Commons 09/24/10 Test implemented functions 09/24/10 Revise any needed implementation pieces 10/01/10 Revise data or service contributions 10/07/10 Test Bed running with real data & services - open for comments 10/11/10 Give presentation about Commons at MN GIS/LIS Consortium Conference 10/15/10 Assess how implemented functions meet workgroup defined needs 11/04/10 Describe what other functionality is needed 11/04/10 Modify implementation if appropriate, based on feedback 12/02/10 Recommend how that functionality might be acquired or created 12/02/10 Recommend whether the ESRI product should be used for a production site 12/02/10 Create draft recommendations for a production Commons 12/16/10 Modify and approve recommendations for a production Commons 01/06/11 Create draft project plan for a productions commons 01/20/11 Modify and approve project plan for a production commons 02/03/11 Report to stakeholder organizations and geospatial community 02/11/11 Model service level agreements 02/11/11 2 people Articulate the benefits of sharing services and a system that supports it 02/11/11 2

3 Design Subgroup Recommendations Wednesday, July 28, 2010 Summary Workgroup Members: Chris Cialek, Jessica Deegan, Mark Kotz, Chris Pouliot Others: David Brandt, Washington County Joel Koepp, City of Roseville Alison Slaats, 1000 Friends of MN The front page Should be really simple simple like Google. Should say something like Minnesota Geospatial Commons, The place to find and share geospatial resources Then geospatial resources should link to an explanation (data, web services, applications, etc.) Should not have complicated navigation menu all around it It should quickly get people to the FIND function of the commons Front page (and maybe every page) should also clearly tell people that this is where they can SHARE too, but that should not be as prominent as FIND because FIND will be a much more common reason to go to the Commons. Front page should have FIND with a text box to do a simple, default search on the full text of all metadata records. It will be important to think about creating a brand for the Commons and maybe a logo. Should have link to a detailed about this site page. 3

4 The FIND (search) page Should provide query/filter options on the left and results on the right. The results should change as query/filter items are changed Results Sorting o Could be organized/sorted in three ways. Perhaps the user could select which way they want to see them By relevance (default) By theme category (might be challenging due to metadata limitations) Alphabetically by title Results formatting o Results could look like Google with a title, then abstract, then link o Results could be more table-like, with a row for each result and more discrete pieces of information about each result. The group seemed to feel this was preferable to the Google style because it could convey more information Using icons (e.g. type of resource) and small browse graphic, etc. can provide a lot of info in a small space Would be nice to sort on the applicable columns of info Results elements that would be valuable to see (note this list flowed quickly from the group, then we couldn t think of anything else) o Title o Abstract o Type of resource o Browse graphic o Link to full metadata o Link to download dataset or to web service ( add to map as one option) o Source/Publisher of resource o Last updated date Query/Filter items that would be valuable (again, this initial list came quickly, then we didn t think of anything else) o Spatial extent Could be draw a box and/or pick from a list (e.g. counties, metro area) o Constrain metadata search fields (e.g. just search on title and abstract) o Type of resource o Publisher (could be a pick list) o Date (displayed as date range, or by currency, e.g. within last month?) o ISO theme category *Note when filtered, it should be obvious to user what elements are in play 4

5 Additional considerations For type of resource, we will need to flesh out how much detail this has. Will it just be Data, Web Service, Application? Or will it have detail like shapefile vs. geodatabase or points vs. polygons, etc. Somewhere it might be nice to have these things, but we seemed to come to agreement that we should leave them off of the front page to keep it simple. o Top 10 downloads o What s new (recently posted or updated) Users should be able to setup feeds for notification of various things. Maybe this happens in the profile page Example sites o Car Soup o Oregon Alphabetical rows of info style results example Search/query Google style results example o GEOSS ESRI portal example o Natural Resources Canada we didn t find this Examples found after the meeting o Compusult s GEOSS portal has sort of Google style results but with several icons, and browse graphic, etc. and some clickable filters. Shows selected filter (thought the filters didn t actually work for me). 5