Ben,
I planned to attend the OGC TC meeting in Spain; I would be very pleased to
contribute to the discussion. Indeed, to discuss about feature, coverage and
O&M views of scientific data is an important subject.
I tend to agree with Andrew on the possibility to revamp the arguments started
at the Interop Day in Boulder. I guess the workshop presentations are still
available on the GALEON Web site.
Another place where many interested parties would be collocated is EGU.
--Stefano
I think it's a good time to have this
discussion. Just to put my stake in the sand - I
think all these protocols are important and have
their place in different scenarios. The key (as
always) is the underlying information model - I
tried to make this argument in a presentation at
the Interop Day in Boulder a while back. For
CSML, conformance with O&M has always been of
fundamental importance - the CSML feature types
are specialisations of the O&M Sampling
Features. I've also argued in the past for a
simple pattern in the case of sampling features
that makes it all fall into place for the
majority of our kind of data - for Sampling
Features, the Observation result is a coverage.
The different protocols are suited to serving up
different parts of the information model.
Look forward to the discussion in Spain!
Regards,
Andrew