HELP To fill in the questionnaire, you must
  • Register to the TWiki (you can do it even without being an OGC member)
  • Edit the page
  • Add a row for your answer to each question. Each row of the table is a line containing of one or more cells. Each cell starts and ends with a vertical bar '|'. Any spaces at the beginning of a line are ignored. You can split rows over multiple lines by putting a backslash '\' at the end of each line
  • Save


1-Does your organisation use the OGC Web Map Service? If Yes, since when? if No , Do you use other Web Map Services? Do you have plans to use OGC WMS?
Answer N° yes no if Yes If No
A Yes 2003  
B Yes 2008-Internal Usage  
C Yes Internally  
D Yes 2007  
E Yes mid-2008, several test environments, also in a prototype implementation for NinJo  
F Yes mid-2007 , in development / FT environment  
G Yes mid-2008
H Yes 2008
I Yes 2008
J Yes 2005
K Yes 2004
L Yes 2006ish
M Yes 2006ish
N Yes 2006
O Yes 2003
P Yes the National Weather Service (NWS) has created the following OGC WMS servers:
  1. Radar and Warnings WMS (EXPERIMENTAL). Service disseminates NWS radar and hazard data to internet users.
  2. Hurricane WMS (EXPERIMENTAL). Service disseminates NWS Hurricane forecast data to internet users.
  3. iNWS WMS (EXPERIMENTAL). The service disseminates NWS radar, satellite, and hazard information to internet and mobile users.
  4. Flood Outlook WMS (EXPERIMENTAL). The service disseminates significant river flood outlook data
  5. NDFD KML WMS (EXPERIMENTAL). The service disseminates National Digital Forecast database (NDFD) data encoded in Keyhole Markup Language (KML).
  6. Ridge Radar WMS (EXPERIMENTAL - Internal). Service disseminates NWS radar and hazard information to internet users through public web pages.
Q Yes 2005

2. Do you use, or plan to use, WMS in operationally? If Yes, from when?
Answer N° yes no From When
A Yes 2003
B Yes 2008-Internal Usage
C Yes. We would like to use the WMS service for Earth Observation product visualisation to allow end user to familiarise themselves with EUMETSAT products. 2010
D Yes, we have been using it for testing but we may migrate our mapscript queries to WMS during the next year 2010
E Yes, it is planned to have OGC-WMS services running operationally end of 2009 end 2009
F Yes 01/10/2008
G Yes Internally since june 2009
H Yes we hope to operationalize some services before 1-1-2010
I Yes Internally in forecaster's workstation Synergie 4.4 since June 2009. It is planned to have OGC-WMS interface on Imagery database running operationally by the end of 2009, and another OGC-WMS interface for road forecast application end 2009
J Yes operational at present
K Yes since April 2009, approximately 90 external registered users
L No We're a research group, we don't run "operational" servers, but we run a WMS server on a best-efforts basis
M Yes Operational at present, expecting to increase service dependence over time
N Yes Currently we operationally serve some met-maps (vectorial layers) through WMS with Geoserver and our goal is also start serving the met-ocean models maps via OGC services during next year
O Yes We deploy WMS and WMS clients for our customers. Some of them use WMS operationally, some others plan to do so.
P Yes  
Q Yes 2007

3. If you use WMS, which version? e.g. OGC WMS 1.1 or WMS 1.3 or other
Answer N° Version
A 1.1.1
B 1.1
E 1.1.1
F 1.1.1 Operationally 1.3.0 supported internally
G 1.1.1
H 1.0.0 and 1.1.1
I 1.1.1 and 1.3.0
J 1.1.1 and 1.3.0
K 1.1.1 and 1.3
L 1.1.1 and 1.3.0
M 1.1.1 and 1.3.0
N 1.1.1 and 1.3.0
O 1.1.1 and 1.3.0
P 1.0.0, 1.0.7, 1.1.0, and 1.1.1
Q 1.1.1

3-a. Which software and hardware to you use to supply these services (server)?
Answer N° Server
A MapServer
C GeoServer, considered UMN MapServer
D MapServer
E GeoServer developed for Tomcat. We deployed and operate the software on Oracle Internet Application Server 10g. The application server runs on a HP Proliant DL360-G2 machine with operating system Suse Linux Enterprise 7.2. Simple test server written in Java are used, not using any existing solution to better adapt to the needs of meteorological data. E.g. ""model run"" dimension and such.
F IBL Visual Weather Version Dell 2950 running ESX. 6 single core VM’s on a content switch, each with Visual Weather server installation running with it’s own native database
G MapServer
H UMN-MapServer plus in-house developed server (C++) running on Linux hardware
I In-house PHP framework and MapServer for the road forecast application
J GeoServer (internal), ArcGIS Server, ArcIMS, MapServer
K MapServer 5.2 - operational Dell Intel RHEL 5.0
MapServer 5.4 & 5.0 experimental DEL 2950s - Intel 5400 64 bit RHEL 5.0
L ncWMS on multi-processor CentOS system
L ncWMS, MapServer, GeoServer, RHEL/CentOS Linux servers
N GeoServer, ncWMS and THREDDS (with WMS enabled), PostGIS running on an Ubuntu Server
O Luciad and ncWMS
P Radar and Warnings WMS ArcGIS Server on Blade Server
Hurricane WMS ArcGIS Server on Blade Server
iNWS WMS GeoServer on Blade Server
Flood Outlook WMS ArcGIS Server on Blade Server
NDFD KML WMS ArcGIS Server on Blade Server
Ridge Radar WMS MapServer on Blade Server
KOUN WMS GeoServer on Xeon Server
Q UMN MapServer Diana, running on Debian/Ubuntu Dell Server

3-b. Which software and hardware to you use to consume these services (client)?
Answer N° Client
A OpenLayers, mapbuilder, chameleon
B Custom
C GeoServer comes with a demo with OpenLayers, which we might consider using
D OpenLayers and MapServer as a client
E NinJo, Google Earth, NASA World Wind and OpenLayers on several hardware platforms, depending on the client application
F Adobe Flex. Google Earth
G SmartMet II (internally), OpenLayers
H In-house built HTML/JavaScript, OpenLayers, Google Earth
I Synergie client worksation, OpenLayers on road forecast application , soon other applications
J ArcMap, OpenLayers, Google Earth, IDV, custom programs. Unable to determine all clients used by public
K OpenJump, Google Earth, ArcGIS Explorer, UDIG, ArcGIS Desktop, MapInfo, OpenLayers, GeoServer, MapServer
L OpenLayers + custom Javascript = "Godiva2" site
M Primarily OpenLayers + custom Javascript, but also others including Godiva2, Google Earth, etc
N Godiva2, Google Earth, QGis, ArcMap, IDV, NetcdfTools, Community Mapbuilder, GeoExt
O Godiva2, OpenLayers, NASA World Wind, Gaia
P Ridge radar web page Google Earth API Blade Server
iNWS web page OpenLayers/Google Maps/Locally Developed Client Blade Server
Miscellaneous uses ArcGIS Varies
NWS customers Numerous Unknown
Q OpenLayers with our own addons

3-c. Are these services available across the Internet? If Yes where?
Answer N° yes no Where
A Yes
B No  
C No  
D No No, they are used for drawing static maps or internally
E Yes partially
F Yes, through secure Met Office login. No services available “Free” yet
G No, only internally at the moment  
H Yes <> . This is however a demonstration project at the moment.  
I No WMS for road forecast will be available across the Internet through secure Meteo-France login
J Yes
K Yes Requires users registration
L Yes Front page of WMS is
M Yes Main portals & Direct WMS urls subject to change (email for current URLs)
N Yes, some of them
O No  
P Yes 1. Radar and Warnings WMS (EXPERIMENTAL):
  2. Hurricane WMS (EXPERIMENTAL):
  4. Flood Outlook WMS (EXPERIMENTAL):
Q Yes, getCapabilities

4. Are Which type of data do you handle with WMS?
Answer N° Data handled with WMS
A Air, climate, biodiversity, water.
B Orthophoto
C Image data
D Radar data and lightning data, as well as some base maps
E Vector data stored in Oracle Spatial: station maps,warnings, observations, flashes. Raster data as: GRIB, netCDF, GeoTIFF, ESRI ArcGrid. Examples:climate maps, forecast maps, radar, satellite images. Plan geo-referenced raster images with NinJo-Batch. This than includes everything that is displayable in NinJo. Meteograms, Soundings, etc. could also be geo-referenced and displayed as ""pop-ups"" in a WMS client.
F GRIB: Atmospheric, Wave models, Sub-sea models.BUFR: RADAR GTS: Observations, Upper Air soundings. SATELLITE: AUTOSAT (proprietary Met Office format)
G Near real-time weather radar data, static maps, Satellite images processed with CineSat. Plan for NWM data through our prorietaty Q3/Brainstorm server
H Raster data satellite products (GOME/SCIAMACHY), ECMWF ERA-40 dataset (partly), raster data precipitation data, swath satellite products.
I Geographic data, real time raster radar and satellite data, road vectors colored in accordance with meteorological parameters on road forecast application
J Air, climate, ocean, natural hazards, relief, DMSP satellite products
K Operational Server:
Bureau of Meteorology Boundaries: Coastal Waters Forecast Areas, High Seas Forecast Areas, Public Weather Forecast Districts, Rainfall Districts
Numerical Weather Prediction: Mean Sea Level Pressure from LAPS model (updated 2 / day and include forecasts from analysis time to 72 hours in 3 hourly time steps); Sea Surface Temperature (updated daily); 10 m Wind Analysis from LAPS model (updated 2 / day and include forecasts from analysis time to 72 hours in 3 hourly time steps)
Radar: Radar Locations; Radar Optimum Extent Areas; Radar rainfall intensity (updated every 6-10 minutes for 60 radar sites)
Satellite: Satellite IR – Black and White (updated hourly); see:
Experimental server:
Weather Observations: METAR (updated continuously, with most readings every 30 minutes)
Flood Warnings: River Conditions/Flooding (updated continuously)
Tropical Cyclone (TC): Fix Points; Track Lines; Wind Areas; Forecast track areas;TC Warning areas;TC Watch areas.
Models: Smoke Plume models (HYSPLIT)
Satellite: Satellite IR - Colour (updated hourly)
Radar: Rainfields
Aviation: Terminal Aerodrome Forecast (TAF); Trend Type Forecast (TTF); Area Forecast (ARFOR); SIGMET; Significant Weather Charts (SIGWX)
Mapping Application using Open Layers (experimental)
Background layers: Roads, River, Lakes, Places, Catchments, Rainfall District, Elevation, State and Country boundaries
Climate: Climate grids (rainfall, minimum and maximum temperature); Climate stations
L 4D numerical model output and high-level satellite products (L3 and L4)
M Climate data, primarily satellite imagery/data, model + forecast runs, coastline + grid + other overlays
N Vectorial data stored in a PostGIS database or shapefiles and raster data stored in netCDF (numerical models outputs), GeoTIFF...
O GRIB and netCDF data
P NWS WMS disseminate the following meteorological content :
Radar and Warnings WMS:Weather radar data/NWS issued weather hazards
Hurricane WMS:Hurricane track forecasts/Hurricane cone forecasts/Hurricane points forecasts
iNWS WMS:Weather Radar data/Satellite data (visible, infrared, and water vapor)/NWS issued weather hazards
Flood Outlook WMS:Significant river flood outlook data
Q Meteorological and oceanographic data

5. Which map projections do you use?
Answer N° Projections
A EPSG:4326, EPSG:42304
B D48/GK, D96/TM
C Mercator would like support for Orthographic
D EPSG:4326, EPSG: 23031
E EPSG:31467 (Gauss-Kruger zone 3), EPSG:4326 (World Geodetic System 1984)
F EPSG:4326, EPSG:54004, EPSG:900913
G EPSG:4326, PROJ4:"+proj=stere +lat_0=90 +lat_ts=60 +lon_0=0 +k=1 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +a=6378273 +b=6356889.449 +units=m +no_defs", PROJ4:+proj=stere +lat_0=90 +lat_ts=60 +lon_0=10 +k=1 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +a=6378273 +b=6356889.449 +units=m +no_defs", PROJ4:+proj=stere +lat_0=90 +lat_ts=60 +lon_0=20 +k=1 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +a=6378273 +b=6356889.449 +units=m +no_defs
H EPSG:4326, EPSG:28992. Radardata has a non-EPSG native projection, which is specified by PROJ4: namespace. Consequently the radarservice supports all many PROJ4 projections.
I EPSG:4326, EPSG:900913, EPSG:32661, EPSG:32761, would like support for Orthographic, parametric CRS
J EPSG:4326
K EPSG:4283 EPSG:4326 EPSG:4202 EPSG:54004 EPSG:28348 EPSG:28349 EPSG:28350 EPSG:28351 EPSG:28352 EPSG:28353 EPSG:28354 EPSG:28355 EPSG:28356 EPSG:28357 EPSG:28358 EPSG:3111 EPSG:3308 EPSG:3112 EPSG:102171 - World Mercator EPSG:9804 EPSG:9805 EPSG 3785 (testing)
L Almost all projections supported by GeoTools (hundreds I think), but we've mainly used EPSG:4326, north and south polar stereographic and British National Grid
M EPSG:4326 + Mercator for stored data, but support anything that our servers will reproject to
N EPSG:4326, EPSG:23029
O WGS84 EPSG:4326, Mercator EPSG:3395, UTM EPSG:32{6-7}[01-60]
P Not applicable
Q Mostly polar stereographic, some Mercator and unprojected lat lon. All projections assume spherical earth

6. Have you encountered any problems with WMS in term of limits or ambiguities of the OGC standard, of performance, of product metadata definition... ? Please describe them and how you solved them.
Answer N° Answer
A Not with WMS per se, but with lack of metadata population in GetCapabilities and FGDC/ISO metadata, which can hinder discovery.
B No
C We would like to have also access control, such as the service can be monitored from where it is used. Is this available in WMS 1.3 ? We would like WMS to support time based access. is this available in WMS 1.3 ?
D We are looking for the best way to use the time variables, which are multiple in meteorology. We are also looking for some way to restrict the access to some layers. Both topics were discussed during the Reading meeting, but only the first one has some solutions
E meteorological time parameters (model-run, forecast-time). In our opinion this is the main drawback so far. Standardization is needed here. Those time-domain standards should be integrated into the OGC reference implementation (geoserver)
F OGC standard – BBOX interaction with the anti-meridian mentioned in 1.1.1 (albeit briefly). Not mentioned in 1.3.0. Performance issues – constantly. Will implement tiling and caching in front of WMS server in Autumn. Product metadata, some problems with update of model runs. If a model “partially” arrived i.e. a subset of expected parameters, the GetCapabilities would report a DIM_RUN available for all parameters. No DIM_FORECAST would then be available. Now supplied with software that can assess availability of each parameter.
G WMS standard issues: A single time dimension is insufficient for meteorological data, dynamic availability of data (list of timestamps of particular data available from the server), unable to filter/search Capabilities, unable to describe cross section coordinate systems. Technical: Poor performance, crash of MapServer over the polar region map requests, unable to read some NWM GRIB files.
H Specification of time and height dimensions. We use now the standard TIME dimension, which does not cover modelruns for example. Performance problems were encountered with large satellite swath products (not solved).
I Specification of time and height dimensions. Dynamic and potential avaibility in GetCapabilities. GetCapabilities layering, Balance Service URL - Layer - Dimensions. Ontology is necessary for keywords, DIMENSION parameters. Performance issue : Tiling and real time meteorological data
J A single time dimension is insufficient for meteorological data. Difficulty in specifying custom projection in request, issues with anti-meridian crossing data and Pacific-centered views.
K Time dimension, Spanning an area across international dateline e.g. Pacific Ocean, South hemisphere symbology -esp. wind barbs, WCS & OPeNDAP integration.
L Time dimension (model run time, forecast time), dealing with multiple vertical dimensions (sigma coordinates, height coordinates), can't specify units, finding an efficient way to handle styling
M Time dimension, ambiguities over what should be done with multiple image returns (composite? last one on top?), palettes (using ncWMS extensions)
N Handling time and height dimensions and some display issues with palettes and scales, most of them solved with ncWMS extensions
O Specification of elevation (when used with height expressed as pressure for instance) and time dimensions.
P No
Q We have two problems regarding dimensions
If a layer has multiple dimensions, it's assumed that all combinations of all dimensional values are available. A layer might have data for time=1990/2000/P1Y where elevation=0, but only 1996/2000/P1Y for elevations 500, 1000 or 2000. We have not found a way to express this dependency between time and elevation in the WMSCapabilities document. A current workaround is to define multiple layers, one where elevation=0 and one where elevation="500,1000,2000"
A layer might have several mutually exclusive dimensions. e.g. a layer might have data for 1000, 850 and 500hPa, and also for 0, 500 and 1000 meters above ground. In this case, the first dimension will be named "pressure" and the second will use "elevation". In this case, the client must include elevation=value OR dim_pressure=value in the GetMap request, but the standard requires the client to include both (unless one or both have defined default values). In this case too, the workaround is to define multiple layers, one for each available dimension

7.Are you interested in participating in any Interoperability Experiments in the next few months?
Answer N° Interest
A Sure
B No
C No. We could be interested in 2010
D Yes, but I would have to ask which data we can share
E Yes
F Yes
G Yes
H Yes
I Yes
J Yes
K Yes
L Yes
M Yes
N Yes
O Yes
P Yes, the NWS is interested in participating in a WMS Interoperability Experiment.
Q Possibly

7.a. :Yes:If Yes, what resources can you offer? Staff effort, expertise, server, client, hardware, software?
Answer N° Resources
A Expertise
E an offer of resources can not be made so far. This should be discussed in more detail with regard to the requirements
F Limited resources, internet facing WMS / WCS / WFS server with limited dataset a possibility (after security considerations)
G Server+client, Meteorological nearly operational data (maybe radar?) (Data policy and access issues as well as staff resources need to be negotiated)
H Staff effort: yes, but limited. Expertise: yes, but limited. Server: <> Client: Adaguc web-portal; source code can be made available on request. Software: item
I Staff effort: Yes but limited. This should be discussed with regard to the requirements. Security issues : we'll have to set servers in DMZ
J Yes
K We would be able to provide testing and development on a limited scale through our experimental services and viewing via registered users.
L Expertise, ncWMS software (we can modify this to support experiments), test server
M Limited staff effort, expertise (particularly on integrating many providers) and a test environment with a large amount of data
N Limited staff effort and operational data (models outputs, lightning, met-ocean observations...)
P The NWS would contribute its three Internet facing experimental WMS services.

7.b. :No: If No, what on what time scale would you consider?
Answer N° Time scale

8. : Is your organisation a member of OGC?
Answer N° OGC Member ?
A via GeoConnections / Natural Resources Canada
C Yes
D No
E No
F Yes
H Yes, through the Dutch Ministry of Transport
I Yes
J Yes
K Yes, through AODC-JF but will also be joining directly
L Yes, through NERC, but University might join directly
M Yes, through NERC
N No
O Yes
P The NWS is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration which is a Principal Member of the OGC
Q No

9. : Do you wish to add any comments?
Answer N° Comments ?
D We really appreciate the efforts that you are doing for making meteorology compatible with the standards
E No
H The Adaguc website/web services are freely available. We would however appreciate to be warned if someone wants to engage in large scale performance testing!
J No
K To date, most of our effort has been to provide services to BOM's registered user community which includes defence and emergency management and local service providers. Effort has been in defining services, naming conventions, symbolization, automation, corporate buy in, support and governance. It is vital that we get a handle on standardisation of symbology and naming conventions if we are to provide global solutions.
While WMS has been great for providing visualization, clients also need to undertake analysis and hence require data via WFS or WCS (which needs more development).
There also needs to be integration between the OPeNDAP / NetCDF and OGC environment. Note that our MapServer environment which is coupled to our Service Information Management System has been an effective solution for the registered user community. We are now using the MapServer and tile cache as a backend to OpenLayers to provide a public view tool. This system is currently being trialled internally
There has been a lot of work recently with GeoServer esp. since the release of 1.7. We will be reviewing GeoServer 2.0 once released and will be happy to share results. Note we currently run GeoServer 1.6 for community schema web services. Recently discussed with GeoServer developers with regard to applications schemas, virtualization (good for non raster data), scripting (now available), web processing service (for integrating and automating business intelligence), SOS and TML (for sensor data feeds), WMS tile server spec (for dealing with n dimensional data), symbology (true type fonts and others), security and performance (comparison with MapServer-which leapfrogs but the two communities are working together) all of which seem very positive.
L This is a big area including many data types. We should look for quick wins and low-hanging fruit
M Mainly interested in dealing with areas of ambiguity or increasing the control over output, but without compromising the ease of use of WMS. For more complex usage, we'd rather switch to another protocol (e.g. WCS/WFS) than change WMS
Q No

Answer N° Name Organisation Email Phone
A Tom Kralidis Environment Canada  
B Ales Versic Environmental Agency of The Republic of Slovenia +386 1 478 4534
C Michael Schick EUMETSAT +49 6151 807 447
D Roger Veciana i Rovira Servei Meteorològic de Catalunya (SMC) +34 567 60 90
E Dirk Heizenreder DWD +49 69 8062 2652
E Dr. Jürgen Seib DWD +49 69 8062 2609
F Matt Wardle Met Office  
G Ilkka Rinne FMI  
H Ernst de Vreede KNMI +31 30 2206595
I Frederic Guillaud Meteo-France +33 5 6107 8118
J David Neufeld NOAA NGDC  
K Robert Wilson Australian Bureau of Meteorology  
L Jon Blower University of Reading, UK  
M Mike Grant Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UK
N Marcos Hermida MeteoGalicia, Galicia, Spain +34 981 957 461
O Benjamin Chartier Magellium, France benjamin.chartier at
P John Schattel NWS, NOAA 301-713-0056 x111
Q Helen Korsmo Research & Development Department, Norwegian Meteorological Institute  

-- ChrisLittle - 26 Oct 2009
Topic revision: r24 - 17 Dec 2009, ChrisLittle
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