-- Please add questions, issues, etc to this page
Issue and Works current status summary target : Impact on the Profile doc, info : Comments, TODO : Actions
Handling of TIME dimension addon TIME is validity time For generic WMS clients the decision taken in Toulouse to offer best product OK (responsibility of the data provider to select /define his policy)
DIM_RUN_BASE_TIME For MO profile clients, another set of layers using TIME and DIM RUN_BASE_TIME
DIM_FORECAST_OFFSET not needed anymore target MO Profile:. A TIME default value should be defined by the server. TIME=« Current ». It is server policy to define how to implement « Current »
Issue: not all combinations of TIME/RUN are possible info The works here are put in standby until more Return of Experience from the I.Es or until the Modelling WG makes other proposals
Synthesis of the Met Ocean Modelling WG works on Time- March 2011  

Layers Naming    
Projections /CRS addon The projections needed by the community and not available at the moment are the GEOS projection and Polar Stereographic projection with arbitrary base meridian. TODO Identify projections of the community and explore defining URIs in the OGC namespace (as appropriate)
Current projections referenced in the WMO GRIB data format are here: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/WMOCodes/WMO306_vI2/2010edition/GRIB2ver7/GRIB2_7_0_0_CodeFlag.pdf in Code Tables 3.1 to 3.10 etc, which are expanded here: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/WMOCodes/WMO306_vI2/2010edition/GRIB2ver7/GRIB2_7_0_0_Temp.pdf  

The GEOS projections is based on a specific ellipsoid

WMO adoption of WGS84 and EGM96 are on p96 of http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/ois/Operational_Information/Publications/CBS/CBS_Ext06_1017/1017_en.pdf
TODO Evaluate the error of the approximation if GEOS supposed on WGS84 and see with WMO the possibilities to update the definition of GEOS
plugin Adrian Custer Liaise actively with WMS1.4 SWG targetMO profile « you should not use multiple bounding boxes for a given layer unless they cross the anti-meridian, in this case they should be connected at the longitude of the anti-meridian»  
  First Check works already done in WCS WG or Unidata WCS CRS works
  Support INSPIRE projections (ETRS)
Vertical coordinates Several options have to be evaluated :
- use the DIM ELEVATION, TIME(Pro : expected by Mass market, con : not multi layer capable) if use of DIM or vertical CRSs , make shortcuts for T500, MSLP…?
- use of a DIM TBD?, (Pro : multi layercapable, con work, unexpected, no general client will recognize semantic) Look at WCS
- put the level into the name of the layer? (Pros : easy, different styles possible/ con : doesn’t scale) Review options considering specific use cases
- define vertical CRSs? (Pros : compliant with WMS1.3/ con : not very detailed, governance? Examples?) Get more information from OGC
- 3D CRS can be defined as combination of 2D CRSx1D vertical CRS)  
Vertical coordinates used in the WMO GRIB data format are here: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/WMOCodes/WMO306_vI2/2010edition/GRIB2ver7/GRIB2_7_0_0_CodeFlag.pdf Tables 3.15, 3.21 and 4.5  
Metadata Search and filtering Get Capabilities layering or metadata and Time handling_ plugin To be driven by CSW
Standardised parameter names for validation

Standard parameter names used in the WMO GRIB data format are here: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/WMOCodes/WMO306_vI2/2010edition/GRIB2ver7/GRIB2_7_0_0_CodeFlag.pdf Code Table 4.1 and 4.2

Standard parameter names used in the WMO BUFR and CREX data formats are here: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/WMOCodes/WMO306_vI2/2010edition/BUFRver16/BUFRCREX_16_0_0_TableB.pdf Table B

A simplification of WMO parameter names proposed to help automate production of URIs.

ECMWF also has an online machinable table of names, but with small changes from the WMO Standard.

Asynchronous and dynamic delivery plugin Aaron Braeckel Liaise actively with pub/sub SWG Asynchronous delivery for off line data
Recurrent subscription i.e. subscription to future data
Notification of availability of new data/layer
Notification of other changes impacting getcapabilities (e.g. using filters)
Check they will address issue of guarantee of delivery
Done Provide input to pub/sub SWG
Styling addon plugin Ilkke Rinne and Chris Little Liaise actively SLD/SE SWG Should define styles for WMO symbology, register these names, use in profile
  target MO Profile Should define basic styles for each classical parameter and recommend to servers implementations to offer these styles
  Done Provide input to SLD/SE 2.0
Integration with other systems GRIB, WCS, Opendap plugin Follow the works on WCS2.0 extensions Make sure GRIB is considered but Not in the scope of MO WMS profile
Cross section description

Request=getcrosssection& line=lat1,lon1,…&style=?&vertical_axis=? More work is needed

A proposed template used in the WMO GRIB data format is here: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/WMOCodes/WMO306_vI2/2010edition/GRIB2ver7/GRIB2_7_0_0_CodeFlag.pdf template 3.1000

May be not a WMS issue
Standardise GetFeatureInfo   Need best practice for GetFeatureInfo result information
  TODO Agree on what GFI must return depending on the type of layer (NWP output, satellite image, radar,…)?
How to improve GetFeatureInfo Could that be used to return several types of info, e.g. vertical profile, time-series, …–Either•Extend existing operation: GetFeatureInfo&info_type=vertical-profile•Create new operation: GetVerticalProfile,… May be not a WMS issue
WMS metadata : How to serve extra Metadata about WMS Layers and maps addon plugin Adrian Custer Liaise actively with WMS1.4 SWG MO profile should then recommend to MO servers to return everything which is not exactly as specified explicitly into the client request
Might be splitted into two issues Metadata about the service and about the data offering (projections, )AND Meta information about the map response (min max value, TIME served interpolation algorithm, ..)
Versions of different level between Servers and Clients Version negotiation part of the standard MO Profile: recommendations for server offering to Mass Market clients should be version agnostic
  target MO Profile: should recommend to implement at least WMS 1.3.0 if INSPIRE compliancy required
  WMS2.0 might fit better MO users requirements than WMS1.3.0
Forming correct URLs   Described into WMS 1.3.0 doc
plugin Adrian Custer Liaise actively with WMS1.4 SWG General HTTP Request Rules §6.3 in WMS1.3 doc : Take care this possibility is still available into WMS2.0 and makes it explicit
Animations addon If server serves maps with dynamic colormaps, it can be confusing in animations TODO MO Profile might define recommendations for animations
What about the image/gif MIME type  
What about frame rate  
Tiling   TODO MO DWG need to review all profile suggestions with WMTS

-- -- ChrisLittle - 10 May 2011
I Attachment Action Size Date Who Comment
OGC_Met-Ocean_DWG+Its-about-time+2010-11-15_(TANDY)_v1.0.pptppt OGC_Met-Ocean_DWG+Its-about-time+2010-11-15_(TANDY)_v1.0.ppt manage 4 MB 11 Feb 2011 - 14:33 MarieFrancoiseVoidrotMartinez It’s about TIME Proposal of standard conventions for TIME within the meteorology community Based on Met-Ocean DWG discussion at OGC TC Meeting (Sept 2010) & subsequent review
Topic revision: r7 - 11 Jul 2011, MarieFrancoiseVoidrotMartinez
This site is powered by FoswikiThe information you supply is used for OGC purposes only. We will never pass your contact details to any third party without your prior consent.
If you enter content here you are agreeing to the OGC privacy policy.

Copyright &© by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding OGC Public Wiki? Send feedback