WaterML 2.0 SWG

Download Charter documentThis Standards Working Group (SWG) is focused on processing the OGC GeoServices REST 1.0 candidate standard.
This OGC GeoServices REST Candidate Standard Version 1.0 standard is derived from the “Esri GeoServices REST Specification Version 1.0” which was developed to provide interoperability between ArcGIS Server and the broader information technology community. The candidate standard is designed to be implemented without the use of Esri products. The OGC version differs from the Esri version in that it is presented in a vendor neutral fashion appropriate for an OGC standard. The specification currently provides a JSON encoding, but does not limit alternate JSON representations (such as GeoJSON).
The scope of work includes addressing the OAB comments and adjudicating the comments received during the public review, additional edits to the candidate standard based on the comments, and removal of “esri” references and prefixes. The final deliverable of the OGC GeoServices REST SWG is a version of the candidate standard that follows the OGC Modular Specification policy.
A public review of a draft of the candidate standard was started in July 2012. The SWG has processed the comments and the resolution of the comments is documented in OGC 12-164.
Based on the comment resolution a revised draft of the candidate standard has been prepared and submitted to the OGC Technical Committee. During the ongoing adoption vote in the OGC Technical Committee several comments have been received. The response to these comments are documented in OGC 13-031r1.
Information about the process can be found in the OGC Technical Committee Policies and Procedures.The OGC GeoSPARQL standard supports representing and querying geospatial data on the Semantic Web. GeoSPARQL defines a vocabulary for representing geospatial data in RDF, and it defines an extension to the SPARQL query language for processing geospatial data.
The first version of the GeoSPARQL standard has been completed. OGC document 11-052r4 GeoSPARQL – A Geographic Query Language for RDF Data was published on June 12, 2012 as an OGC Implementation Standard.
More information about the standard, including downloads for the standard document and associated ontologies, can be found on the GeoSPARQL standard web page: http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/geosparql
This work has been harmonized with the OGC Simple Features standard, ISO 19107, and with the SPARQL working group in the W3C.
 GeoSynchronization Service
Agile spatial data infrastructures based on OGC standards allow content provider organizations to deploy increasingly efficient networks capable of responding to dynamic requirements for using geospatial or location referenced content. In this context, content provider organizations are being more and more called upon to deliver current, timely and verified data over the World Wide Web.
 
In order to satisfy these requirements, content providers must collaborate with outside entities to collect new data and/or update their existing data holdings. This may, for example, mean synchronizing their data with closest-to-source providers as might be the case between municipal, state/provincial and/or federal levels of government. This may also mean crowd-sourcing (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdsourcing) their data production or supporting volunteer geographic information (VGI). Crowd-sourcing or VGI has proven to be a very effective mechanism for emergency management / disaster relief situations as is evidenced by the response to the Haiti earthquake of 12-JAN-2010.
 
Regardless of the nature of the collaboration, there is a need for a service to mediate the interaction between data providers and outside entities acting as data collectors. The service must support data entry with validation, notification of changes to interested parties and allow replication of the data provider's features.
 
A Geosynchronization service, deployed by a data provider, sits between the features a provider offers via a WFS and data collectors. It allows data collectors to submit new data or make modifications to existing features without directly affecting the features in the provider's data store(s) until validation has been applied thus ensuring that the data published by the provider is of high quality.
 
The concept of a GeoSynchronization service was developed during the Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastructure (CGDI) Interoperability Pilot project. The CGDI-IP project was an activity developed by GeoConnections in collaboration with the OGC's Interoperability Program to test the feasibility of using open, standards-based technology to improve the management and dissemination of geospatial data in Canada. In particular, this project demonstrated that technology from multiple vendors based on the Open Geospatial Consortium’s Web Feature Service (WFS) standard could interoperate to provide access to the most current and authoritative data; thereby maintaining currency, avoiding unnecessary versioning and minimizing duplication of the data. The main development of CGDI-IP was conducted from April 2007 to January 2008. The initial concept was further enhanced during the OGC Web Service Phase 5 project, a project in Canada with the Ministries of Natural Resources Québec and Transport Québec and several projects with Army TEC in the United-States. All the projects tested and extended the concepts of a federated Geosynchronization system.
 
Purpose of the Standards Working Group
The purpose of the Geosynchronization Service SWG is to produce a version 1.0.0 implementation standard.
Scope of Work
The SWG shall review and edit the "OWS-7 Engineering Report -- Geosynchronization service" to produce a version 1.0 implementation standard. The review shall be both a technical and editorial review. The items that need to be addressed by the SWG include:

1. Update 10-069r2 to conform to the latest OGC document directives including the Modular Specifications Policy.
2. Add an abstract test suite.
3. Validate all schemas and examples.
4. Address any other technical and/or editorial issues that arise during the review period.

Only those change requests and comments submitted through the formal process as identified in the Policy and Procedures shall be addressed.  Any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc. will be outside of the scope of this SWG untilsubmitted as a formal CR.
What is out of scope?
As describe in Clause 1, the Geosynchronization service has been under development since 2007 and has been tested in a good number of test beds and projects.
 
As a result, the scope of work shall be tightly confined to the current contents of OGC 10-069r2 and aspects of the service not already described in OGC 10-069r2 shall be out of scope.
 
In other words, the feature list shall be limited to what is already described in the OWS-7 engineering report.
Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for this implementation standard shall be OGC 10-069r2.
How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed
The Geosynchronization Service SWG shall be dissolved after the following three milestones have been achieved:

•  
  1. The SWG has reviewed and edited 10-069r2 to produce a V1.0 candidate standard.
  2. SWG membership approves a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard.
  3. The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.

Description of deliverables
There shall be two deliverables:

1. A document containing a list of proposed changes resulting from the review period and the disposition of each CR.
2. A V1.0 candidate standard.

IPR Policy for this SWG
The IPR Policy for the Geosyncronization SWG will be RAND and Royalty Free.
Anticipated Audience
Any organization that has a requirement for mediating changes to content in a distributed or federated environment.
Other informative information about the work of this SWG
Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).
The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide all the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:

• IETF RFC 4287, The Atom Syndication Format
• IETF RFC 5023, The Atom Publishing Protocol
• OGC 06-050r2, An Introduction to GeoRSS: A Standards Based Approach for Geo-enabling RSS feeds
• OpenGIS Web Feature Service (WFS) Implementation Specification V1.0, V1.1, V2.0
• OpenGIS Filter Encoding Implementation Specificatons V1.0, V1.1, V2.0
• OpenGIS GML Simple Features Profile V1.0 and V2.0
• Open Search v1.0 (Draft 4)
• Open Street Maps (http://www.openstreetmaps.org)

Details of the first meeting
The first meeting of the committee will be held by telephone conference call at —AM EDT on 22 Sept. 2010. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.
Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the committee will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, possibly every two weeks, with face-to-face meetings perhaps during each of the OGC TC meetings.
Supporters of the Proposal
The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule.
 

Name

Email

Organization

Boisvert, Eric

Eric [dot] Boisvert [at] RNCan-NRCan [dot] gc [dot] ca

Natural Resources Canada

Fegeas, Robin

rfegeas [at] usgs [dot] gov

U.S. Geological Survey

Goldstein, Nuke

ngoldstein [at] thecarbonproject [dot] com

The Carbon Project

Harrison, Jeff

jharrison [at] thecarbonproject [dot] com

The Carbon Project

Keighan, Edric

ekeighan [at] cubewerx [dot] com

CubeWerx Inc.

Mattson, Mark

mmattson [at] thecarbonproject [dot] com

The Carbon Project

Métivier, Romain

romain [dot] metivier [at] mrnf [dot] gouv [dot] qc [dot] ca

Ministère des resources naturelles et de la faune du Québec (MRNF)

Poulin, Gaetan

gaetan [dot] poulin [at] mtq [dot] gouv [dot] qc [dot] ca
 

Ministère des transports du Québec (MTQ)

Stowe, Glenn

gstowe [at] cubewerx [dot] com
 

CubeWerx Inc.

Vretanos, Panagiotis (Peter) A.

pvretano [at] cubewerx [dot] com
 

CubeWerx Inc.

David, Wesloh

David [dot] G [dot] Wesloh [at] nga [dot] mil

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

 
Convener(s)
Panagiotis (Peter) A. Vretanos (CubeWerx Inc.)
Jeff Harrison (The Carbon Project) 
1.    GeoXACML Standards Working Group
 
2.    Purpose of this Standards Working Group
One purpose of the persistent GeoXACML Standards Working Group (SWG) is to develop an OGC Web Services Profile of GeoXACML and to progress it to the state of an adopted OGC standard. This profile will standardize the guidelines how to use GeoXACML to protect OGC Web Services and thereby providing enhanced interoperability in GeoXACML based access control systems for OWS. This profile will also support an easier applicability and implementation of XACML or GeoXACML based access control systems in OWS environments, as the guidelines in the profile that describe precisely how to use the access control language in the OWS use case, will be less generic.
Another purpose of the persistent GeoXACML SWG is to coordinate OGC's work on GeoXACML with the work of the OASIS XACML WG. The aim of this cooperation is to harmonize the closely related and sequential work of both standardization bodies. As shown in the OWS-6 GeoXACML ER (09-036), it is desirable to develop Change Request Proposals (CRPs) for GeoXACML's underlying base standards (e.g. OASIS' eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 2.0 specification, the Hierarchical resource profile of XACML v2.0 and the Multiple resource profile of XACML v2.0) These CRPs will help improve the underlying standards and enable them to handle the OWS specific requirements.
This SWG will also evaluate and resolve CRPs referring to the OpenGIS® GeoXACML implementation specification and incorporate all submitted CRPs into a candidate revision of the GeoXACML v.1.0 standard. The SWG will ensure that all changes are consistent with the OGC standards baseline and business plan.
3.    Scope of Work
The initial Roadmap plan of this SWG can be divided into the following work items:
1.       Develop an OGC Web Services Profile of GeoXACML and progress it to the state of an adopted OGC standard. The following topics have to be covered in the OGC Web Service Profile of GeoXACML (for details see 09-036 - the OWS-6 GeoXACML ER)
o    guidelines for interoperable (Geo)XACML access control decision requests in the OWS context
o    guidelines for interoperable (Geo)XACML access control rules for OWS
o    guidelines how to use XACML's obligation mechanism in an OASIS conformant way in the OWS use case
2.       Cooperation and coordination with OASIS' XACML WG. As explained above and in detail in the GeoXACML ER, it is necessary and promising to improve the OASIS Multiple and Hierarchical resource profile of XACML and the XACML specification itself, in order to be able to handle the complexity of the access control for OWS use case adequately.
3.       Cooperation with other OGC Working Groups. Members of the Security DWG, OWS Common DWG and GeoXACML SWG should cooperate and coordinate their work in order to generate interoperable, general-use and harmonized security solutions. Some topics that need to be addressed by these cooperating groups are (for details see 09-036):
o    develop unique guidelines how to bind return values of the access control process and other Security Services with OWS responses and how to bind security information to OWS requests
o    define standardized security related exception codes
o    define normative bijective transformation rules between different protocol bindings (e.g. transform uniquely from KVP encoded OWS requests to XML encoded requests)
o    ensure an interoperable interplay of GeoXACML with other services of OGC's security architecture
o    specification of minimal requirements for OWS specifications in order to support the sound and strait forward applicability of generic security solutions for OWS
4.       Another scope of work of this SWG will be to process CRPs referring to the GeoXACML Standard. Hence the SWG will collect all GeoXACML related CRPs, evaluate each of these proposals, and make edits to the standard based on change requests and related decisions of the SWG membership. Changes required to the standard to align it with revisions of the standards baseline or business plan also require the submission of CRPs. The SWG may announce a cut-off date for the submission of CRPs that are to be addressed in the next revision. Additional CRPs submitted after the cut-off date may be addressed at the discretion of the SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources. The SWG may decide to address selected CRPs immediately in a corrigendum of the current standard.
3.1       What is out of scope?
Only those change requests submitted through the formal process as identified in the OGC TC Policy and Procedures will be addressed. Therefore, any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc. will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.
3.2       Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for the work will be version 1.0 of the OpenGIS® GeoXACML implementation specification (07‑026r2), OASIS' eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 2.0 specification, the Hierarchical resource profile of XACML v2.0 and the Multiple resource profile of XACML v2.0.
3.3       How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The GeoXACML SWG may dissolve after the following milestones have been achieved (note that this is not automatic as the GeoXACML SWG is a persistent SWG):

• Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit an OGC Web Services Profile of GeoXACML document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard.
• Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit a document to the TC for consideration as a revision of the OpenGIS® GeoXACML Standard deprecating the current version.
• The OGC Web Services Profile of GeoXACML or a revision of the GeoXACML standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees.
• The SWG has completed the evaluation, resolution and incorporation of all CRPs submitted prior to the cut-off date into the candidate revision of the standard.
• Completion of a 30 day public comment period.

4.    Description of deliverables
The initial focus of this SWG will be to develop the following two deliverables:

1. (Candidate) standard: the OGC Web Service Profile of GeoXACML
2. Change Request Proposals for GeoXACML's underlying base standards (e.g. OASIS' eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 2.0 specification, the Hierarchical resource profile of XACML v2.0 and the Multiple resource profile of XACML v2.0).

Other deliverables might result from the work of this SWG, after the two deliverables mentioned above have been completed. The SWG might e.g. continue work on the GeoXACML specification and deliver a candidate for the revision of the OpenGIS® GeoXACML 1.0 Standard for submission to the TC.
The schedule of activities will be documented on the Twiki pages of this SWG and shall be updated by the SWG after every TC meeting. The current plan is to submit a candidate of the OGC Web Services Profile of GeoXACML as soon as possible; ideally before the December 2009 TC meeting. The coordination work between the GeoXACML SWG and the OASIS XACML WG can start as soon as the organizational frame (within the OGC and between the OGC and OASIS is established).
5.    IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free.
6.    Anticipated Participants
The targeted participants of the GeoXACML SWG are those involved in the design, development, implementation, or use of GeoXACML or XACML based access control systems for (OGC) Web Services as well as spatial content providers, traders or users and prospective GeoXACML users. This includes participants of standards working groups of the OGC which develop and maintain OGC standards that can be secured by GeoXACML or referencing GeoXACML.
7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).

• OASIS' XACML WG - XACML 3.0 and certain profiles of XACML 3.0
• OGC's OWS Common DWG - OGC Web Service Common specification
• W3C's XML XPATH and XQuery WG

The SWG will seek and if possible maintain liaison with each of the organizations/WGs maintaining the above works.
b. Details of the first meetingThe first meeting of the SWG will be held as a face-to-face meeting during the June 2009 OGC TC meeting in Boston
c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email, Twiki, conference calls and with face-to-face meetings perhaps at each of the OGC TC meetings.d. Supporters of the ProposalThe following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately "opted-into" the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.
 

Name

Organization

Jan Herrmann

Technische Universität München

Andreas Matheus

Universität der Bundeswehr München

Cristian Opincaru

Secure Dimensions GmbH

Martin Kyle

Sierra Systems, Inc.

Ron Lake

Galdos Systems, Inc.

David Burggraf

Galdos Systems, Inc.

David Wesloh

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

 e. Convener(s)Jan Herrmann, Technische Universität München.
 1. Geography Markup Language 3.3 SWG (GML SWG)
 
2. Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of the GML SWG is to revise the OpenGIS® Geography Markup Language (GML) Encoding Standard. The standard is also published by ISO as ISO 19136:2007.
The SWG may decide - in cooperation with the OGC TCC, the ISO/TC 211 Chairman and the JAG - that the revision should be a joint project with ISO/TC 211 and result in a revision of ISO 19136, too. In this case, the SWG will also deliver one or more ISO New Work Item Proposals for submission by OGC to ISO/TC 211.
The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to evaluate and resolve submitted Change Request Proposals (CRPs) assigned to the GML SWG.
The SWG will ensure that all changes are consistent with the OGC standards baseline and business plan and ISO/TC 211 standards baseline.
3. Scope of Work
This SWG is focused on processing CRPs to be included in the OpenGIS® Geography Markup Language (GML) Encoding Standard. 
The Scope of Work (SOW) will be to collect all outstanding CRPs, evaluate each of these proposals, and make edits to the standard based on change requests and related decisions of the SWG membership.
Changes required to the standard to align it with revisions of the standards baseline or business plan also require the submission of CRPs.
The SWG may announce a cut-off date for the submission of CRPs that are to be addressed in the next revision. The cut-off date for version 3.3 was at the end of the OGC TC meeting in September 2008. Additional CRPs submitted after the cut-off date may be addressed at the discretion of the SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources.
The final deliverable will be a revision of the standard for consideration by the membership for adoption.
The SWG may decide to address selected CRPs immediately in a corrigendum of the current standard.
As part of the CRP review process the SWG will decide on the version number of the revised standard, i.e. 3.3 or 4.0.
3.1 What is out of scope?
Only those change requests submitted through the formal process as identified in the OGC TC Policy and Procedures will be addressed. Therefore, any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc. will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.
3.2 Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for the work will be version 3.2.1 of the OpenGIS® Geography Markup Language (GML) Encoding Standard (07-036) and all formally submitted CRPs. 
3.3 How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The GML SWG may dissolve after the following milestones have been achieved (note that this is not automatic as the GML SWG is a persistent SWG):

1. The SWG has completed the evaluation, resolution and incorporation of all CRPs submitted prior to the cut-off date into the candidate revision of the standard.
2. Completion of a 30 day public comment period.
3. Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as a revision of the OpenGIS® Geography Markup Language (GML) Encoding Standard deprecating the current version.
4. The revision of the standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees.

In case of a joint project with ISO/TC 211, additional milestones may be required.
4. Description of deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:

1. A candidate for the revision of the OpenGIS® Geography Markup Language (GML) Encoding Standard for submission to the TC. As part of the revision process the standard may be split into multiple parts.
2. Corresponding informative schema documents associated with the revision for publication in the OGC schema repository.
3. Release notes documenting the changes introduced in the revision.

The schedule of activities is documented on the Twiki pages of the GML SWG. The current plan is to submit a candidate of GML 3.3 before the September 2009 TC meeting.
The schedule is meant to serve as a general guideline to the SWG in order to determine completion milestones. However, the completion date and other target dates will be adjusted in order to accommodate a critical update to the document(s) or allow for a sufficient discussion of CRPs. The schedule shall be updated by the SWG at every TC meeting.
Although all change requests will be addressed, some may be postponed due to the need to more quickly produce deliverables resolving higher priority requests.
5. IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free.
6. Anticipated Participants
The targeted participants of the GML SWG are implementers of GML and other standards using GML as well as content providers and prospective users of geographic information exposed as XML.
This includes the standards working groups of the OGC which develop and maintain OGC standards normatively referencing GML.
7. Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere)

• Revisions to abstract standards normatively referenced by GML
• Revisions to the OGC specification best practice document (06-135r1)
• Results of the OGC Policy SWG
• Ongoing work in the SWE DWG and Coverages DWG and their associated SWGs
• Revision of ISO 19118

b. Details of the first meeting
The GML SWG kickoff meeting and teleconference was held Tuesday, 25 March 2008, from 10:00 to 12:00 Central time. The meeting took place during the March 2008 OGC TC meeting in St Louis, MO, USA.
c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of this SWG will be carried out primarily by email, the Twiki and conference calls, with face-to-face meetings in principle at each of the OGC TC meetings as defined by the chair.
d. Supporters of the Proposal
The following people supported this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members.

Name

Organization

Clemens Portele

interactive instruments GmbH

Simon Cox

CSIRO

Ron Lake

Galdos Inc.

David Burggraf

Galdos Inc.

Andrew Woolf

British Atmospheric Data Centre (NCAS/BADC)

e. Convener

• Clemens Portele (interactive instruments GmbH)

1. Purpose of the Standards Working Group
The purpose of GMLJP2  Standards Working Group is to move the existing GMLJP2 version 1.0.0 standard through a revision process. The SWG will process impacts to this standard from updates of dependent standards, address omissions from the initial standard, process comments from OWS5, and assess future work items for the initial standard. The work of this SWG will also ensure alignment with all OGC processes, the OGC standards baseline, and OGC's business plan.
2. Scope of Work
The SWG will focus on revisions to the existing adopted standard by collecting all outstanding Change Request Proposals, evaluate each of the proposals, and make edits to the standard based on CRPs and related decisions of the SWG membership. The final deliverable of this SWG is an updated version of the candidate standard for consideration by the membership.
Specific items that are currently identified as being in scope may include (subject to approval by SWG membership):

• Updates to the standard based on updates to normative references within the standard
  • Update from GML 3.1/3.1.1 (OGC 03-105r1/OGC 04-092r4) to GML 3.2.1 (ISO 19136)
  • Update from ISO 19105:2000, Geographic information - Conformance and Testing to ISO19105:2005
  • Update from OWS Common 1.0 (OGC 05-008r1) to OWS Common 1.1.0 (OGC 06-121r3)
  • Update from URNs of Definitions in OGC Namespace (OGC 05-010) to Definition identifier URNs in OGC namespace 1.1.0 (OGC 06-023r1)
  • Update from Recommended XML/GML 3.1.1 Encoding of Common CRS Definitions (05-011)
• Agreed upon omissions from the original standard
  • standard encoding of null data values in an image
• Requirements specified as future work items in the original standard
  • use of unrectified grid coverages
  • external references into a GMLJP2/JPX file using a standardized URI Fragment Identifier Syntax
  • Accommodate specific needs of netCDF (network Common Data Form) for scientific data harmonization of observation syntax
  • temporal relationships between coverages
  • harmonization of observation work

2.1 What is out of scope?
For this activity, out of scope items are defined as:

• those items beyond the aforementioned scope of work that are not identified as Change Request Proposals and approved for inclusion by the membership before the end of calendar year 2007

2.2 Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for this work will be:

• GML in JPEG 2000 for Geographic Imagery (GMLJP2) Encoding Specification (OGC 05-047r3)
• Geography Markup Language 3.2.1 (ISO 19136:2007)
• Geographic information - Conformance and Testing to ISO19105:2005
• OWS Common 1.1.0 (OGC 06-121r3)
• Definition identifier URNs in OGC namespace 1.1.0 (OGC 06-023r1)
• Change Request for Null Data Values against GMLJP2

2.3 How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed
The following rules define the completion criteria of the SWG:

• The impacts from updates to all normative references have been reviewed, decided upon, and integrated into the standard to the satisfaction of the SWG
• The evaluation of all future work items from version 1.0 have been completed, rolled into change requests, or either postponed or dropped from the scope to the satisfaction of the SWG.
• All Change Request Proposals submitted prior to Dec, 31, 2007 have been reviewed and decided upon to the satisfaction of the SWG.
• A completed revision of the GMLJP2 1.1 Specification Document has been produced by the SWG and has been approved for submission to the TC for approval as an adopted specification.

3. Description of deliverables
The deliverables for this SWG will be:

• a revision to the existing standard
• a revised set of schemas

The preliminary schedule of activities includes:

• December 2007 TC (Stresa in lago Maggiore, Italy) - Presentation of existing work and Change Request Cutoff publicized to accommodate OWS5
• March 2008 TC (St. Louis, USA) - Review/Presentation of Change Requests
• June 2008 TC (Bremen, Germany) - Draft Standard for IPR review
• September 2008 TC (College Station, Texas) - Approval of Standard Revision

 
4. IPR Policy for this SWG
This group is set up as RAND-Royalty Free.
 
5. Anticipated Audience
The anticipated audience of this standard is the community of hardware, software, and systems integration professionals that are involved in image acquisition, rectification, encoding, analysis, presentation, and preservation.
 
6. Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).
The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:

• Geography Markup Language
• JPEG 2000
• GeoXACML
• net-CDF
• Web Coverage Service
• Web Feature Service
• Sensor Observation Service
• Observations and Measurements

The SWG intends to seek and if possible maintain liaison with each of the organizations maintaining the above works.b. Details of the first meetingThe first meeting of the committee will be held by telephone conference call at 12PM EDT on 8 October 2007. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the committee will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, every two weeks, with face-to-face meetings perhaps at each of the OGC TC meetings.d. Supporters of the ProposalThe following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule.

• David Burggraf (Galdos Systems)
• Michael Gerlek (Lizardtech)
• Trent Hare (US Geological Survey)
• Steven Keens (PCI Geomatics)
• Martin Kyle (Sierra Systems)
• Lucian Plesea (Jet Propulsion Labs)
• Clemens Portele (Interactive Instruments)
• Alesandro Triglia (OSS Nokalva, Inc.)
• David Wesloh (National Geospatial Intelligence Agency)

e. ConvenerMartin Kyle (Sierra Systems) was the convener of the SWG process, believing that it is time for a revision to the adopted standard.1.    Project Description:
I15 (ISO19115 Metadata) Extension Package of CS-W ebRIM Profile 1.0 SWG
2.    Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to update the "CIM (Cataloguing of ISO Metadata) Extension Package of ebRIM " (OGC Document 07-038), now renamed to "I15 (ISO19115 Metadata) Extension Package of CS-W ebRIM Profile 1.0", to the state of an adopted OGC standard. The SWG will achieve this objective by processing comments raised in the ESA SMAAD (Semantic-Web for Mediated Access Across Domains) project, in OWS9, in the ESA HMA (Heterogeneous Missions Access) AWG (Architecture Working Group) and by SWG members. The specification has been initially written in the frame of the ESA HMA project. The goal was to develop a specification of a catalogue service implementing the ebRIM Application Profile of CS-W for the discovery and management of ISO 19115 and ISO 19119 (in the future part of ISO19115) metadata encoded in ISO 19139 (the corresponding xml schema will in the future be part of ISO19115) and at a minimum equivalent in terms of capabilities to an OGC CSW ISO 19115/19119 Application Profile-compliant service. HMA is part of a European project called GMES (Global Monitoring for Environment and Security). The specification under development is actually at the state of an OGC Discussion Paper document
3.    Scope of Work
There are actually some implementations of this document already in semi production environment. Now, it is time to propose this document to the OGC community to promote it to an OGC standard.
For that, the SWG will organize the comments raised in ESA SMAAD, in OWS9 and in the ESA HMA AWG, evaluate them and process them by editing the document. The SWG will also work with the Catalog SWG and Catalog AP ebRIM SWG and propose Change Requests if some arise.
a.     What is out of scope?
Only those comments coming from the ESA SMAAD project, from OWS9 and from the ESA HMA AWG as well as further change requests submitted through the formal process as identified in the Policy and Procedures will be addressed.  Any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.
The specification of the RIM-objects will be exclusively based on the ISO specifications 19115(-2), 19119 and 19139 which are ISO-standard at the time when the I15 (CIM) SWG resumes it´s work (Jan/2013).
b.    Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
ISO 19115 (part 1 & 2), ISO 19119 and ISO19139, Inspire directives, existing CSW ISO Application Profile specification, INSPIRE Conformance Class of current CIM
c.     How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The I15 (ISO19115 Metadata) Extension Package of CS-W ebRIM Profile 1.0 SWG will dissolve after the following three milestones have been achieved:
1. The SWG has completed evaluation and incorporation into the candidate standard of all comments received during the public comment period.
2. Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard.
3. The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.
4.    Description of deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:
1. A final version of the Cataloging ISO19115 Metadata (I15) using the ebRIM profile of CS-W 1.0 Standard documents for submission to the TC.
2. Corresponding XML schemas associated with Cataloging ISO19115 Metadata (I15) using the ebRIM profile of CS-W 1.0 Standards documents.
The following schedule of activities is anticipated:

1. Resumption of the I15 (CIM) SWG work activities was achieved within a few ad hoc meetings in the context of the Redlands TC meeting (1/2013) and by subsequent emails.
2. Post I15 (ISO19115 Metadata) Extension Package of CS-W ebRIM Profile 1.0 document and schema for a 30-day comment period beginning of September 2013
3. Resolve comments prior to December 2013
4. Post candidate standard with schema for vote beginning 2014

The above schedule is meant to serve as a guideline to the SWG in order to determine completion milestones.  However, based on the number and complexity of the actual Change Requests, completion dates may be adjusted to accommodate critical updates to the documents.  Although all change requests will be addressed, some may be postponed due to the need to more quickly produce a document containing higher priority requests.
5.    IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free
6.    Anticipated Participants
The target audiences of the I15 (ISO19115 Metadata) Extension Package of CS-W ebRIM Profile 1.0 include:
• Users/implementers of ISO catalogs
• National mapping agencies
• Services/Data managers
7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG
d.    Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere)
The proposed standard is tightly linked to OASIS ebRIM, CSW AP ebRIM, CSW, CSW AP ISO, ISO 19115(-2)/19119/19139
e.     Will this be a persistent SWG?
No
f.      Details of the first meeting
Resume of the SWG was achieved within a few ad hoc meetings in the context of the Redlands TC meeting (1/2013) and by subsequent emails.
g.     Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email and a few conference calls, possibly with a face-to-face meeting perhaps at each of the OGC TC meetings.
The teleconference calls will be scheduled as-needed and posted to the OGC portal. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list in advance of the meeting.
h.    Supporters of the Proposal
The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately “opted-into” the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.
- Lorenzo Bigagli  (CNR, I, Lorenzo Bigagli (lorenzo [dot] bigagli [at] cnr [dot] it))
- Roger Brackin (envitia, UK, Roger Brackin (roger [dot] brackin [at] envitia [dot] com))
- David Burggraf (Galdos, CN, David Burggraf (dburggraf [at] galdosinc [dot] com))
- Yves Coene (SPB, B, Yves Coene)
- Pier Giorgio Marchetti (ESA, EU, Pier [dot] Giorgio [dot] Marchetti [at] esa [dot] int)
- Frederic Houbie (Geomatys, F, Frédéric Houbie)
- Michael Schick (EUMETSAT, EU, Michael Schick)
- Stefen Smolder (GIM, B, Steven Smolders)
- Uwe Voges (con terra, D, Uwe Voges)
i.      Convener(s)
Uwe Voges (con terra, D, Uwe Voges)Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of this IndoorGML Standard Working Group is to develop an application schema of OGC GML and progress the document to the state of an adopted OGC standard. The goal of this candidate standard is to establish a common schema framework for indoor navigation applications. This SWG will start from the discussion paper (OGC 10-191r1, Requirements and Space-Event Modeling for Indoor Navigation), which summarizes the requirements and basic idea of a standard for indoor navigation.
Business Value Proposition
This SWG aims to provide a common schema framework for interoperability between indoor navigation applications, which cover a wide spectrum of application areas such as indoor LBS, indoor web map services, indoor emergency control, guiding services for visually handicapped persons in indoor space, and indoor robotics. Several commercial services for indoor spatial information have been recently launched such as Google Maps and Bing Indoor Maps. In order to meet the market demands from these application areas, we need indoor navigation information as an essential component. There are also strong demands of indoor navigation information from other standardization organizations including ISO/TC204 and IEEE RAS to extend existing standards to cover indoor space as well as outdoor space in a seamless way.
However, developing indoor navigation information is difficult and expensive due to the complexity of indoor space. The IndoorGML candidate standard will provide a framework of interoperability between systems and services for sharing indoor navigation information.
Scope of Work
The scope of work for this SWG is to develop a candidate standard of a GML 3.2 application schema for indoor navigation and progress it to the state of an adopted standard by using OGC RFC process as follows;

• development a candidate of OGC standard for indoor navigation: this candidate standard, called tentatively IndoorGML will provide a GML application schema for exchanging information related to indoor navigation,
• gathering comments from SWG member on the draft of candidate standard and reflecting them to the candidate standard,
• submitting the candidate standard to OAB for review and subsequent release for the 30-day public comment,
• resolving the comments from OGC members, and
• submitting the final version of candidate standard to the OGC TC for voting.

The aim of IndoorGML is to represent and exchange the geoinformation that is required to build and operate indoor navigation systems. IndoorGML will provide the essential model and data for important applications like building evacuation, disaster management, personal indoor navigation, indoor robot navigation, indoor spatial awareness, indoor location based services, and the support for tracking of people and goods. IndoorGML provides a framework for the flexible integration of different localization technologies and allows the ad-hoc selection of the appropriate navigation data according to the capabilities of the mobile device and the offered localization technologies of a building.
Indoor navigation comprises route planning, localization, and tracking of subjects (i.e. people) and objects (e.g. robots or other indoor vehicles). IndoorGML will support these activities in different modes of locomotion, i.e. walking, driving, and flying as well as navigation in virtual environments. Since there is no unique localization technology like GPS available indoors, many different types of indoor positioning techniques are used today, often in combination with each other. This makes it necessary to provide geospatial data about the different senders, receivers, and sensors and their respective signal ranges.
Existing standards for the representation of 3D building models like IFC or CityGML do not address these aspects. From the perspective of IndoorGML they can be considered as important data sources for the interior topography of buildings (and other structures like tunnels). IndoorGML, which will be also an application schema of GML, will be thus a complementary standard to CityGML and IFC to support location based services for indoor space, particularly indoor navigation. This candidate standard will mainly consist of two components; first an indoor spatial data model given by a multi-layer space model to describe different contexts of indoor space, and the representation of indoor symbolic space and topological properties, building upon the former component.
The requirements and use-cases for this candidate standard are given in detail in the OGC discussion paper (OGC 10-191r1).
4.2 Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The work of this SWG will start from a discussion paper; OGC 10-191r1, Requirements and Space-Event Modeling for Indoor Navigation.
4.3 Determination of SWG Completion
The IndoorGML SWG will dissolve after the following three milestones have been achieved:

1. The SWG has completed evaluation and incorporation into the candidate standard of all comments received during the public comment period.
2. Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard.
3. The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.

Timeline
The tentative schedule of the activities for this SWG is;

1. SWG kickoff meeting: by Mar. 2012
2. IndoorGML v 0.1: by June 2012
3. SWG internal review of the document and preparation of an updated version v0.2 : by Aug. 2012
4. Revision for version v 0.3: by Sept. 2012
5. SWG voting for submission to OGC OAB/NA and 30 days public comment period: March 2013
6. Public comment period: from April 1 2013 to May 1, 2013
7. Reflection of public comments and revision: by August 2013
8. SWG internal voting for formal submission to OGC TC: September 2013
9. In case of approval for the formal submission to OGC TC, the final candidate standard will be sent to OGC TC for voting: by September 2013

Chair and vice-chairs
Chair:
Ki-Joune Li (Pusan National Univ. South Korea)
Vice Chairs:
Jiyeong Lee (University of Seoul, South Korea)Sisi Zlatanova (TU Delft, the Netherlands)Jeremy Morley (University of Nottingham, UK
 1. OGC KML 2.3 SWG
2. Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of this SWG is to develop a first minor revision (V2.3) to the OGC® KML 2.2 Implementation Standard (OGC 07-147r2) to accomodate known issues and extensions identified in formal OGC Change Request Proposals (CRPs) and tested through implementation experience. The SWG will also make corresponding revisions to the companion OGC® KML 2.2 Abstract Test Suite Implementaiton Standard (07-134r2).
The SWG will achieve this objective by evaluating and resolving the submitted KML Change Request Proposals (CRPs) following the criteria in the KML Development Best Practices (OGC 08-125r1).
The SWG will ensure that all changes are consistent with the OGC standards baseline and business plan.
3. Scope of Work
The SWG will be focused on processing CRPs to the OGC® KML 2.2 ImplementationStandard as there are formal outstanding CRPs to this existing OGC standard.
The Scope of Work (SOW) will be to collect all outstanding CRPs, to evaluate and respond to each of the proposals, and if applicable, to make edits to the standard based on CRPs and related decisions of the SWG membership. The SWG, at their discretion, may also ask the membership for any additional change requests that have not been previously submitted. Each of the outstanding CRPs will be evaluated by the SWG according to the criteria identified in the KML Development Best Practices document (OGC 08-125r1). The SWG will then resopond to each CRP, which may include adopting the proposal with or without modification, rejecting the proposal, or postponing the proposal to a later version.
The SWG will address the existing CRPs in the V2.3 revision in accordance with the OGC TC Policy and Procedures. Additional CRPs submitted after the official formation of the SWG may be addressed at the discretion of the SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources.
3.1 What is Out of Scope?
This SWG will be focused only on outstanding CRPs submitted through the formal process as identified in the OGC TC Policy and Procedures. Any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc., will be outside the scope of this SWG until formally submitted. CRPs that out of scope, if any, will be determined at the discretion of the SWG membership.
3.2 Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for this work will be the evaluation of the outstanding CRPs directed at the existing OGC® KML 2.2 Standard.
3.3 Determination of SWG Completion
The KML 2.3 SWG will dissolve when: 

1. All CRPs submitted up until the official SWG formation date have been reviewed and evaluated to the satisfaction of the SWG. This may include adopting the proposal, rejecting the proposal or postponing the proposal to a later version.
2. Recommendations to submit documentation to the TC as a revised standard as approved by the SWG membership
3. The  revised standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC Standard.

4. Description of Deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG: 

1. A candidates for version 2.3 of the OGC® KML Standard for submission to the OGC TC.
2. Corresponding schema documents associated with the revision for publication in the OGC schema repository.
3. An annotated list of all CRPs including the comment, submitter, comment type/priority, the response of the SWG, and supporting rationale.
4. Release notes documenting the changes introduced in the revision.

5. IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free.
6. Anticipated Participants
The target audience of KML v2.3 includes search engine developers, GIS vendors, mass market software vendors interested in geographic based applications, and consumers.
7. Other Informative Remarks about the SWG
Details of the First Meeting
The first meeting of the SWG will be held at the OGC TC Meeting in Brussels, the proposed time and date is Tuesday, November 29th at 1:00 PM local time in Brussels.
Projected On-going Meeting Schedule
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, with face-to-face meetings in principle at each of the OGC TC meetings as defined by the chair. Other face-to-face meetings may be called if this can expedite the work of the SWG.
Supporters of the Proposal The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately “opted-into” the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.

Name

Organization

Ed Parsons

Google

David Burggraf

Galdos Systems (Chair)

Lucio Colaiacomo

EUSC

Kuo-Yu (Slayer) Chuang

ITRI

Satish Sankaran

ESRI

Sean Askay

Google (Vice-chair)

 
Convener
Ed Parsons, Google.
1.    Moving Features

Applications using moving feature data, typically on vehicles and pedestrians, have recently been rapidly increasing. Innovative applications are expected to require the overlay and integration of moving feature data from different sources to create more social and business values. Efforts in this direction should be encouraged by ensuring smoother data exchange because handling and integrating moving feature data will broaden the market for geo-spatial information such as Geospatial Big Data Analysis.

2.    Purpose of this Standards Working Group

The purpose of this Moving Features Standard Working Group is to develop a candidate  standard for moving features and progress the document to the state of an adopted OGC standard. The goal of this candidate standard is to establish an encoding format for handling moving feature data. This SWG will start from the discussion paper (OGC 12-117r1, OGC Standard for Moving Features; Requirements). This document summarizes the requirements for and basic idea of a standard for applications using moving feature data.

3.    Business Value Proposition

Market demand is rapidly increasing recently for better integration of moving feature data with GIS and other geospatial technologies. Example applications using moving feature data include traffic congestion information services using probe cars or taxis equipped with GPS to measure the travel time of each road link, tracking systems on auto-trucks for logistics management, and agent-based road traffic simulation systems for forecasting traffic situations. Systems relying on single-source moving feature data are now evolving into more integrated systems. Integration of moving feature data from different sources is a key to developing more innovative and advanced applications. This SWG aims to provide a standard for handling and sharing moving features data.

4.    Scope of Work

The scope of work for this SWG is to develop a candidate standard for moving features and progress it to the state of an adopted standard by using OGC RFC process as follows;

• development a candidate of OGC standard for moving feature: this candidate standard, called tentatively “OGC Moving Features Encoding Standard” will provide an encoding format for exchanging moving feature data,
• gathering comments from SWG member on the draft of candidate standard and reflecting them to the candidate standard,
• submitting the candidate standard to OAB for review and subsequent release for the 30-day public comment,
• resolving the comments from OGC members, and
• submitting the final version of candidate standard to the OGC TC for voting.

The requirements for standards on moving features are summarized below;

1. “ISO19141:2008 Schema for Moving Features” should be referred to as the conceptual framework for this development. A standard data model should describe the movement of zero to three-dimensional geometric features including changes in attitude or rotation along with the movement. The target of this specification is rigid features mentioned in ISO 19141:2008.
2. The implementation specifications on moving features should be prioritized, which more directly contributes to the system development because moving feature data is becoming more popular with the very rapid growth of smart phone users worldwide, and this is strongly pushing system developers towards the integration of moving feature data rather than using the moving feature data from a single source. Implementation specifications of general framework to handle movements of features and its derivation for 2D geometries are starting point. The scope of the standardization should be expanded incrementally through communication and discussions with system developers and potential users.
3. Methods specific to moving feature data handling, such as the detection of collisions, could be standardized after data model development arrives at certain level of maturity, based on further analysis of the technology and market trends.
4. Visualization and spatio-temporal interpolation of geometric features are already supported by popular standards such as X3D (http://www.web3d.org/x3d/). Unnecessary overlaps should be avoided, while popular standards should be referred to in developing a new specification on the moving features.

The use cases for standards on moving features are summarized below;

1. Integrated simulation for disaster risk management: Moving feature data is collected/integrated from different simulation systems such as people evacuation simulations, road vehicle simulations including emergency vehicles, and tsunami simulations. Many of them, except the tsunami simulations, are agent-based simulation systems that explicitly output the trajectories of individual agents, i.e., pedestrians and vehicles. The trajectories are described in this specification.
2. Traffic information services: Traffic congestion and the trafficability of roads can be estimated to provide guidance information to road users from real-time vehicle trajectory data collected from probe cars. Sources are becoming diversified from a fleet of taxis with GPS belonging to a single company to the mixture of auto-trucks, buses, and navigation system users. This trend makes it more necessary to integrate data using different models and formats. Integrated data have recently been used to identify traffic accident hot spots by analyzing a large amount of data on vehicle trajectories and velocity/acceleration changes.
3. Security services: This service requires the generation and sharing of situational information as a common picture by integrating and visualizing data on pedestrian and vehicle movements collected from heterogeneous sensors like surveillance cameras, GPSs, and mobile phones.
4. Navigation for Robots: Robots are expected to guide and help in the movement of elderly or handicapped people in public spaces like shopping malls. Since robots can identify only near-by obstacles and moving features with laser range and/or vision sensors, they may require situational information on a larger scale, and this requires integration of the trajectory data from the moving features collected through sensor networks.
5. Aviation, maritime traffic monitoring: Track information should be shared among organizations for air traffic control, ocean monitoring, etc. This specification is applicable to such track information and systems including vessel tracking systems and emergency management systems for oil spill monitoring.

The justifications of the new candidate OGC standard are summarized below:

1. ISO 19141:2008 compliant implementation standard
2. Massive data handling

The relation between this new candidate OGC standard and other existing standards are summarized below;

1. Harmonized with: ISO19141:2008 Schema for Moving Features (trajectory and prism model)

The RoadMap plan of the activities for this SWG is;

1. 2013/01 Discussion paper v 0.2, Ad-hoc meeting
2. 2013/03 SWG charter post & review & approved
3. 2013/03 SWG Kickoff meeting
4. 2013/06 Moving Feature v 0.1
5. 2013/09 Moving Feature v 0.2
6. 2013/12 Moving Feature v 0.3
7. 2014/01 SWG voting for 30 days public comment period
8. 2014/02 Public comment period
9. 2014/05 Reflection of public comments and revision for Moving Feature v 0.4
10. 2014/06 SWG internal voting for formal submission to OGC TC
11. 2014/07 In case of approval for the formal submission to OGC TC, the final candidate standard will be sent to OGC TC for voting

4.1        What is Out of Scope?
The following activities are out of scope for the initial OGC Moving Features specification, but may be in scope for future versions of the OGC Moving Features specification, or other related specifications as indicated.
l  Non-rigid features (future or related)
l  Moving Features data service interfaces (related)
l  Coverage data (i.e. water movement) (related)
l  Sensor measurements data (related)
4.2        Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The work of this SWG will start from a discussion paper; OGC 12-117r1, OGC Standard for Moving Features; Requirements.
4.3        Determination of SWG Completion
The Moving Features SWG will dissolve after the following three milestones have been achieved:

1. The SWG has completed evaluation and incorporation into the candidate standard of all comments received during the public comment period.
2. Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard.
3. The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.

5.    Description of Deliverables

The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG;

• A final version of Moving Features standard documents for the submission to the TC, and
• Corresponding schemas associated with Moving Features.

6.    IPR Policy for this SWG

R RAND-Royalty Free.    RAND for fee

7.    Anticipated Participants

Those involved in the design, development, implementation, or use of elements listed above in "Scope of the Work". This includes search service providers, prospective users of search services exposed as XML, information architects and bibliographic, metadata, and content provider.
 

8.    Other Informative Remarks about this SWG

a. Similar or Applicable Standards Work (OGC and Elsewhere). The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:

• ISO 19141:2008 Geographic information -- Schema for moving features
• OGC Simple Features Specification for SQL
• Web3D X3D

b. Details of the First Meeting
The first meeting of the SWG will be held at the OGC TC in Abu Dhabi on March 17-21 2013. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.
 
c. Projected On-going Meeting Schedule
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, possibly every month, with face-to-face meetings perhaps at each of the OGC TC meetings.
 
d. Supporters of the Proposal
The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately “opted-into” the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.
 

Name

Organization

Ryosuke Shibasaki

The University of Tokyo

Akinori Asahara

Central Research Laboratory, Hitachi, Ltd.

Thomas H. Kolbe

Technische Universität München

Ki-Joune Li

Pusan National University

Kuo-Yu slayer Chuang

Industrial Technology Research Institute

Carl Stephen Smyth

OpenSitePlan

Jiyeong Lee

University of Seoul

Mike Botts

Botts Innovative Research

Steve Liang

University of Calgary

John Herring

Oracle

Christine Perey

PEREY Research & Consulting

Toshiaki Iwata

National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science & Technology (AIST)

David Burggraf

Galdos Systems Inc

 
e. Convener(s) Ryosuke Shibasaki (Center for Spatial Information Science, The University of Tokyo) 
1.    Observations and Measurements v2 Standards Working Group
 
2.    Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of the O&M v2 SWG is to consider revisions to the OpenGIS® Observations and Measurements Implementation Standard..
A revision of O&M has been triggered by submission of OGC O&M to ISO/TC 211 as a proposed New Work Item. The submission was made under the liaison arrangement between ISO/TC 211 and OGC, and the Work Item has been assigned the number 19156. If the document submitted to ISO is approved as a Committee Draft, then an Editing Committee will be formed to process the document. It is expected that the ISO processes will result in changes to the standard, and an OGC SWG can provide a liaison with OGC, to ensure that the concerns and requirements identified by OCG members are attended to and that the final document is suitable as a revised OGC standard as well as an ISO standard. The SWG will ensure that the results of  harmonization efforts involving OGC WCS and SWE activities are introduced to the EC if appropriate.
This Standards Working Group will also evaluate and resolve submitted Change Request Proposals (CRPs) assigned to the O&M v2 SWG. The OGC SWG may propose intermediate revisions of O&M for publication through OGC only.
The SWG will ensure that all changes are consistent with the OGC standards baseline and business plan and ISO/TC 211 standards baseline.
3.    Scope of Work
As a New Work Item in ISO/TC 211 the management of the proposed standard is under the rules of ISO/TC 211. However, as a joint project between OGC and ISO/TC 211, OGC members are eligible to serve on a Joint Editing Committee together with those nominated directly by ISO/TC 211. Hence, the most direct way for OGC members to be involved in the progress of O&M is to nominate for the Joint Editing Committee. Nevertheless, there will be OGC members who choose not to join the ISO EC, so the O&M SWG will provide a means for them to maintain an interest in the progress and status of the work
The Scope of Work (SOW) of the O&M SWG will be to (a) monitor the progress of the ISO 19156 Editing Committee, review changes proposed to the standard, and respond to ISO/TC 211 in a timely manner (b) collect CRPs submitted by OGC members, evaluate each of these proposals, and dispose of them in a manner which is consistent with OGC processes respecting the liaison arrangement with ISO/TC 211. This shall be achieved by (i) referring the content of CRPs that are found to impact on core O&M to ISO 19156 EC for disposal, while (ii) CRPs that extend or profile core O&M may be considered independently by the O&M SWG.
The "core O&M " is defined by the scope statement in the O&M draft document submitted to ISO (see 3.2), and corresponds with the  elements in the UML packages in the model described in that document. The OGC O&M SWG shall provide timely feedback to ISO 19156 EC on issues raised by OGC members relating to the core O&M models.
The SWG may announce cut-off dates for the submission of CRPs that are to be addressed in accordance with the OGC TC Policy and Procedures. Additional CRPs submitted after the cut-off date may be addressed at the discretion of the SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources.
The deliverables of the SWG will be revisions of the standard for consideration by the membership for adoption.
The SWG may decide to address selected CRPs immediately in a corrigendum of the current standard.
3.1       What is out of scope?
Only those change requests submitted through the formal process either  (a) of ISO/TC 211, or (b) as identified in the OGC TC Policy and Procedures, will be addressed.  Any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc. will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.
3.2       Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
In support of the NWIP submission to ISO/TC 211, a revised draft of the O&M specification document was prepared using the ISO template with the content modified to conform to ISO expectations.  This is based on OGC O&M (07-022r1 and 07-002r3) and has been made available through the OGC portal as OGC document 08-141. This will form the baseline for the work of the SWG.
The primary changes relative to OGC O&M are (i) re-organization into the ISO template, (ii) consistent use of normative language, (iii) re-structuring of the presentation around the normative elements in the UML model, and (iv) re-packaging of the model and encoding to better support conformance testing. In most cases the changes to the document have no effect on the functional content of the standard, though a small number of changes to the model have been made in response to application experience.  The proposed normative changes are described in an Annex F of 08-141.
3.3       How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The SWG will remain active until the disbandment of the ISO 19156 EC, with the expectation that standard(s) issued as a result of the work of ISO 19156 EC be also issued as an OGC standard(s). Documents describing extensions to, or profiles of, the O&M standard may be submitted to the OGC TC for publication as separate standards.
The work on revision of O&M will be finished after the following milestones have been achieved:
1.       The SWG has completed the evaluation of all CRPs submitted prior to the cut-off date, and their referral to ISO/TC 211 for resolution, or resolution and incorporation into the candidate extensions or profiles of the standard within OGC.
2.       A revised version of O&M has been issued by ISO, and then provided for publication through OGC.
3.       Completion of a 30 day public comment period.
4.       Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as a revision of the OpenGIS® Observations and Measurements Standard deprecating the current version.
5.       The revision of the standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees.
4.    Description of deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:
1.       Candidates for the revision of the OpenGIS® Observations and Measurements Implementation Standard for submission to the TC. The primary document ("ISO/OGC O&M") is expected to be a major revision of the O&M standard that is identical to the result of the work of ISO 19156 EC. As part of the revision for OGC, re-classification of the standard as a Topic of the Abstract Specification might be recommended. The ISO standard may or may not include a normative XML implementation, though the OGC version is expected to. Additional standards that comprise extensions to, or profiles of, ISO/OGC O&M may also be produced.
2.       Corresponding XML schema documents associated with the revision for publication in the OGC schema repository.
3.       Release notes documenting the changes introduced in the revision.
The SWG will report the version(s) of O&M that the SWG is working on in its reports to the TC including the anticipated schedule.
Although all change requests will be addressed in each revision, some may be postponed due to the need to more quickly produce deliverables resolving higher priority requests.
5.    IPR Policy for this SWG
X RAND-Royalty Free.  ?  RAND for fee
6.    Anticipated Participants
The targeted participants of the O&M v2 SWG are (a) members of the ISO 19156 EC who are also OGC members (b) OGC members with an interest in Observation metadata, sampling of the natural environment, and sensor-web applications.
 
7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).
An NSF funded project "Scientific Observations Network" (SONet), PI Mark Schildhauer (UCSB), has recently been established, with the goal of harmonizing various models for observations in environmental studies. The SWG will seek and if possible maintain liaison with this project, with the intention of generating CRPs for O&M to assist in alignment with the results of the SONet project, if applicable.
b. Details of the first meeting The first meeting of the SWG will be held at 11am-1pm on Wednesday 3rd December in conjunction with the meeting of the Valencia OGC Technical Committee. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting. The primary business of the first meeting will be to arrange for a request for comments to OGC members, to complement the ISO 19156 EC process. c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls. The SWG will commence regular work when the ISO 19156 EC has been formed and its schedule announced. The volume of meetings will be determined by the number of changes proposed by ISO 19156 EC and through CRPs submitted through OGC. There will be face-to-face meetings SWG in conjunction with OGC TC meetings when needed.   d. Supporters of the Proposal The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately "opted-into" the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed.

Name

Organization

Simon Cox

CSIRO

Andrew Woolf

e-Science Centre, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

Ingo Simonis

International Geospatial Services Institute

Luis Bermudez

Southeastern Universities Research Association

Alexandre Robin

Spot Image

Stefano Nativi

CNR-IMAA

Yvan GHIRARDELLI

Thales

Mike Botts

UAH

Phillip Dibner

Ecosystem Associates

Gerry Creager

TAMU

 
  e. Convener(s) Simon Cox, CSIRO Exploration and Mining.
  1. OLS v1.3 SWG2. Purpose of the Standards Working Group The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to extend the OLS 1.2 specification with navigation capabilities. 3. Scope of Work The scope of work consists of the following:

1. Incorporate the pending changes to the OLS 1.2 specification to add navigation capabilities as a new service.
2. Harmonise the Route core service with the new navigation service.
3. Make any necessary changes or additions to other areas of OLS required to meet the first two goals.

3.1 What is out of scope? Any major changes to the OLS 1.2 specification not pertaining to navigation are out of scope. 3.2 Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point The following are to be used as a starting point for work in the SWG:

1. OLS 1.2 specification.
2. Results from OWS 2, 3, and 4 test beds.
3. Pending changes to the OLS 1.2 specification accepted by the OLS 2.0 RWG.

3.3 How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed The work of the SWG will be completed when an OLS 1.3 specification is adopted by the OGC TC.. 4. Description of deliverables The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:

1. A final version of the OLS v1.3 Specification Document, including "Abstract Test Suite" sections for submission to the TC.

The following schedule of activities is anticipated:

1. Start date will be November 1, 2007.
2. Review of comments completed by the three week rule for the April 2008 TC meeting in St. Louis, USA.
3. Final version of the OLS v1.3 Specification Document for submission to the TC.

5. IPR Policy for this SWG RAND-Royalty Free. 6. Anticipated Audience Those involved in the design, development, implementation, or location based services as listed above in "Scope of the Work". This includes content providers, developers, and providers of location based services..  7. Other informative information about the work of this SWG a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere). For example: The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:

• ISO TC 204 WG 3
• ISO TC 211
• ISO/TS 19103:2005, Geographic Information - Conceptual Schema Language
• ISO 19105:2000, Geographic information - Conformance and testing
• ISO 19107:2003, Geographic Information - Spatial Schema
• ISO 19109:2005, Geographic Information - Rules for Application Schemas
• ISO 19111:2003, Geographic information - Spatial referencing by coordinates
• ISO 19115:2003, Geographic Information - Metadata
• ISO 19123:2005, Geographic Information - Coverages
• ISO/TS 19139:2007, Geographic Information - Metadata - XML schema implementation
• ISO/IEC 19775:2004, X3D Abstract Specification
• ISO/CD 17267, Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) - Navigation System Application Programming Interface (API)
• ISO 14825: 2004 Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) - Geographic Data Files (GDF) - Overall data specification.
• OpenGIS® Abstract Specification Topic 0, Overview, OGC document 04-084
• OpenGIS® Abstract Specification Topic 5, The OpenGIS Feature, OGC document 99-105r2
• OpenGIS® Abstract Specification Topic 8, Relations between Features, OGC document 99-108r2
• OpenGIS® Abstract Specification Topic 10, Feature Collections, OGC document 99-110
• OpenGIS® Geography Markup Language Implementation Specification, Version 3.1.1, OGC document 03-105r1
• OpenGIS® Open Location Services (OLS) Specification, Version 1.2, OGC document 07-074
• IETF RFC 2396, Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax. (August 1998)
• W3C XLink, XML Linking Language (XLink) Version 1.0. W3C Recommendation (27 June 2001)
• W3C XMLName, Namespaces in XML. W3C Recommendation (14 January 1999)
• W3C XMLSchema-1, XML Schema Part 1: Structures. W3C Recommendation (2 May 2001)
• W3C XMLSchema-2, XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes. W3C Recommendation (2 May 2001)
• W3C Xpointer, XML Pointer Language (XPointer) Version 1.0. W3C Working Draft (16 August 2002)
• W3C XML Base, XML Base, W3C Recommendation (27 June 2001)
• W3C XML, Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition), W3C Recommendation (6 October 2000)

The RWG intends to seek and if possible maintain liaison with each of the organizations maintaining the above works. b. Details of the first meeting The first meeting of the committee will be held by telephone conference call at 1 PM EDT on 7 November 2007. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.c. Projected on-going meeting schedule The work of the committee will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, nominally every two weeks, with face-to-face meetings at each of the OGC TC meeting where sufficient members are present to do useful work. d. Supporters of the Proposal The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule.

• Will Wilbrink, MapInfo
• John Herring, Oracle
• Cecil Goodwin and Gil Fuchs, Tele Atlas
• Marwa Mabrouk, ESRI
• Geoff Hendrey and Bert Jakubs, deCarta
• Steve Smyth, MAGIC Services Forum
• Olaf Lem, LogicaCMG
• Johnny Tolliver, ORNL

e. Convener - Steve Smyth Acknowledgements. Thanks to OASIS for providing a template as the basis for defining the OGC SWG template.1.    Open GeoSMS SWG
OGC Open GeoSMS 1.0 Standard Working Group
2.    Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of this Standard Working Group is to use the OGC RFC process to move the
                                OGC 09-142r4 OGC Candidate Open GeoSMS Standard
as an OGC adopted standard.
The candidate standard is currently an OGC "Discussion Paper".
The scope of the candidate standard is to define the exchangeable SMS format to exchange GPS information for different LBS devices or applications.
The SWG will ensure that the standard is consistent with the OGC baseline and business plan.
3.    Scope of Work
This SWG is established to move OGC 09-142r4 OGC Open GeoSMS Specification (being already an OGC "discussion paper" document) to OGC adopted standard status.
The scope of the work of this SWG is:

• Gathering comments from SWG members;
• Applying SWG agreed comments to the candidate standard;
• Submit the updated candidate standard to the OAB and request that the document be released for a 30 day public comment period;
• Gathering comments from OGC members;
• Review all comments and for approved comments, update and edit the candidate standard document;
• Submit final candidate standard document to OGC TC for approval as an OGC adopted standard.

 
SWG working plan and timeline as follow:

• SWG kickoff: 01/05/2010
• Review of the document and preparation of updated version V0.3.1 (draft for SWG internal review          delivered 2 weeks before): 14/05/2010
• SWG voting for submission to 30 days public comment period: by 30/05/2010
• Public Comments Period: from 21/06/2010 to 20/07/2010
• Processing of the gathered comments and preparation of updated version V0.4.1 (draft for SWG internal review delivered 2 weeks before): 13/08/2010
• Voting for formal submission to OGC TC: by 20/08/2010
• In case of successful voting, the final candidate standard will be sent to OGC TC by 27/08/2010

 
3.1       What is out of scope?
The only change requests and comments on the candidate standard that will be considered are:
1.       Those submitted by the SWG members
2.       Those provided by OGC Members and the public during  the 30 day public comment period
 
3.2       Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The candidate standard originates from the previous OGC "Discussion Paper" document:
OGC 09-082r4 OGC Open GeoSMS Specification
3.3       How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The OGC Open GeoSMS Specification SWG will dissolve after the following three milestones have been achieved:

• The SWG has completed evaluation and incorporation into the candidate standard of all comments received during the public comment period.
• Approval by the SWG membership of a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard.
• The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.

4.    Description of deliverables
The following is the list of deliverables of this SWG:

• Open GeoSMS Specification V0.3.1, taking into account the first set of comments raised by the SWG itself and ready for being submitted to the 30 days public comment period: 21/05/2010
• Final document to be submitted to OGC as V1.0

 
The Open GeoSMS Specification includes:

• The document itself, in Microsoft Word 2003 ,2007 and PDF formats;

 
5.    IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free. 
6.    Anticipated Participants
The expected audience and participants to this SWG are those involved in the design, development, implementation, or use of exchange SMS of GPS data.              
This is not meant as a limiting statement but instead is intended to provide guidance to interested potential participants as to whether they wish to participate in this SWG.
7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a.Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).:      OGC 09-142r4 OGC Open GeoSMS Specification
     OGC 09-082r2 Sensor Web Enablement Application for Debris Flow Monitoring System in Taiwan
 
b. Details of the first meeting
The first meeting of the SWG will be held by telephone conference call at UTC 02:00PM on 02 Mar. 2010. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG\'s e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, possibly every two weeks, with face-to-face meetings perhaps at each of the OGC TC meetings.   d. Supporters of the Proposal The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately "opted-into" the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.

Name

Organization

Kuo-Yu Chuang

Industrial Technology Research Institut

Mike Botts

University of Alabama in Huntsville

Nobuhiro Ishimaru

Central Research Laboratory, Hitachi, Ltd.

Lan-Kun Chung

GIS Center, Feng Chia University

Roland Wagner

Beuth Hochschule für Technik Berlin

 
  e. Convener(s) Kuo-Yu slayer Chuang(ITRI)
Acknowledgements. Thanks to OASIS for providing a template as the basis for defining the OGC SWG template.

 
 Chair: Jim Greenwood, Co-Chair: Rudiger GartmannPurpose of the Standards Working GroupThe purpose of this Standards Working Group is to evaluate and work the proposed change requests assigned to the OGC Web Service Common Version 1.2. It will achieve this objective by evaluating and processing the Change Requests listed in Section 3 and ensuring that the standard is consistent with the OGC baseline and business plan.Scope of WorkThis SWG is focused on processing change requests to be included in OGC Web Services Common 1.2. The Scope of Work (SOW) will be to collect all outstanding Change Requests, evaluate each of these proposals, and make edits to the standard based on Change Requests and related decisions of the SWG membership. The work of the SWG will be to consider at least the following Change Requests:

1. Add Flexible Metadata (OGC 07-042)
2. Add XML Elements and Types for Parameters (Section 3.1 of OGC 04-105)
3. Add Conformance Classes (Not yet drafted, analogous to OGC 07-058r2 for WCS)
4. Add General Reference System (OGC 07-059)
5. Add SOAP Encoding (OGC 06-094)
6. Add Time Zone Offset Request (Section 7.1 of OGC 06-022)
7. Define a URN to Identify Service Type (OGC 06-150)
8. Expand Multilingual Abilities (Not yet drafted, analogous to OGC 06-149r2 for WMS)
9. Improve Abstract Test Suite (Annex A)
10. Improve Schema Modularization (Section 2.1 of OGC 04-054r1)
11. Include remoteSchema attribute in Metadata Element (Section 3.4 of OGC 04-105)
12. Include Filter Capabilities (Section 2.2 of OGC 04-054r1)
13. Nested KVP Parameter Encoding
14. RESTful Additions and / or Changes
15. Support Rights Management (OGC 06-177)
16. WSDL Recommendations Annex (OWS-2 Architecture IPR OGC 04-060)
17. Split OWS Common document into parts (Drafted)

Additional Change Requests may be addressed at the discretion of the SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources.What is out of scope?Only those change requests submitted through the formal process as identified in the OGC TC Policy and Procedures will be addressed. Therefore, any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting PointThe starting point for the work will be version 1.1 of the OGC Web Services Common standard (OGC 06-121r3). In addition, the work previously done by the OWS Common 1.2 RWG will be used, as documented on the Twiki pages rooted at https://portal.opengeospatial.org/twiki/bin/view/OWSCommon/ChangeRequestsForOWSCommon120. How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been CompletedThe following criteria will be used to determine the completion of the SWG:

1. All Change Requests submitted prior to May, 31, 2008 have been reviewed and evaluated to the satisfaction of the SWG. This may include working the proposal, rejecting the proposal, or postponing the proposal to a later version.
2. A completed revision of OGC Web Services Common V1.2 Standards Documents have been produced and reviewed by the SWG and has been approved for submission to the TC for approval as an adopted standard.

Description of deliverablesThe following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:

1. A final version of the OGC Web Services Common V1.2 Standards Documents for submission to the TC. Based on Change Request #17 listed under Scope of Work earlier in this document, OGC Web Services Common V1.2 standard may be split into multiple documents.
2. Corresponding schemas associated with version 1.2 of the OGC Web Services Common Standards document(s).

The following schedule of activities is anticipated:

1. Begin the organization and assignment of work activities during the OWS Common 1.2 SWG kickoff teleconference to be held Thursday, 10 January 2008, from 11:00 to 12:00 Eastern time.
2. Internal review of version 1.2 of the OGC Web Services Common Standards document(s) during TC meetings March, 2008. This review will include initial evaluation of which proposed changes are not likely to be ready in time for inclusion in version 1.2.
3. Internal review of version 1.2 of the OGC Web Services Common Standards document(s) during TC meetings June, 2008. This review will include final evaluation of which proposed changes are not likely to be ready in time for inclusion in version 1.2.
4. Final version of the OGC Web Services Common V1.2 Standards document(s) at least three weeks prior to TC meetings September, 2008.
5. Standards document(s) submitted to the TC during the TC meetings September, 2008.

The above schedule is meant to serve as a guideline to the SWG in order to determine completion milestones. However, based on the remaining Change Requests, the completion date may adjust in order to accommodate a critical update to the document(s). Although all change requests will be addressed, some may be postponed due to the need to more quickly produce document(s) containing higher priority requests.IPR Policy for this SWGRAND-Royalty Free. Anticipated AudienceThe target audience of OGC Web Services Common V1.2 is any implementers and / or users of OGC standards which reference the common functionality with the OGC Web Services Common V1.2 Standards Document(s). This includes the standards working groups of the OGC which develop and maintain those OGC standards.Other informative information about the work of this SWGa. Similar or applicable standards work:None.b. Details of the first meetingThe first meeting of this SWG will be by teleconference on January 10, 2008, from 11:00 to 12:00 Eastern Standard time. c. Projected on-going meeting scheduleThe work of this SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, with face-to-face meetings at each of the OGC TC meetings as defined by the chair. The teleconference calls are currently planned every two or three weeks on Thursdays at 11:00 - 12:00 AM Eastern time.d. Supporters of the ProposalThe following people support this SWG and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule.

NameOrganizationArliss WhitesideBAE SystemsRüdiger Gartmanncon terraPeter VretanosCubeWerxPeter SchutNR Canada/GeoconnectionsStan TillmanIntergraphAndreas MatheusUniversity of the Bundeswehr - IT ISSteven KeensPCI GeomaticsMarcellin PrudhamIGNBastian SchaefferWestfälische Wilhelms-Universität MünsterAlessandro TrigliaOSS Nokalva

e. Conveners

1. Arliss Whiteside (BAE Systems)
2. Rüdiger Gartmann (con terra)

The purpose of the OWS Context SWG is to produce a version 1.0.0 implementation standard.
The principle use case for an OWS Context document is for defining the application state of an Integrated Client. When this application state is reproduced by two or more Integrated Clients, such clients are said to share a common operational picture.  The OWS Context SWG will evaluate and incorporate the best aspects of WMS Context, OWS Context, KML and Location Organizer Folder (LOF) into a new OWS Context proposal that would expedite the adoption of a normative 1.0 version of an OWS Context specification.  The work will emphasize ease of implementation through the use existing well established formats and protocols. 
The SWG shall review existing material, e.g. in form of OGC Engineering Reports and Standards (both OGC and external), to produce a version 1.0 implementation standard that clearly defines how to enable publish/subscribe functionality for OGC Web Services in a common way. If applicable, this standard may be a component of the OWS Common suite of standards. The items that need to be addressed by the SWG include:
1.      Write a core document that clearly defines the requirements for enabling publish/subscribe functionality.
2.      Write extension documents that define how to realize the core publish/subscribe functionality for a specific service binding (e.g. SOAP, POX, RESTful) – for the bindings the SWG decides to support in the initial version of the standard.
3.      Develop examples and – if necessary to enable core functionality – conceptual models and their XML Schema implementation (e.g. for notification metadata).
4.      Address any other technical and/or editorial issues that arise during the review period.
Only those functional requirements and comments submitted through the formal process as identified in the Policy and Procedures shall be addressed. Items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc. will be outside of the scope of this SWG unless the SWG decides to include them.
1.    RESTful Service Policy Standards Working Group

The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) sees value in Web Services and Applications which make use of a RESTful approach to design. OGC believes that a common understanding and agreement on how to structure Resource Models and leverage uniform Web interfaces, in other words a common RESTful approach to the design and standardization of Web services, will lead to both improved interoperability and greater accessibility for these services. During the OGC Technical Committee (TC) meeting in Boulder in September 2011, the REST Subcommittee members recommended forming a standards working group to write such a policy standard. 

Note: REST stands for “Representational State Transfer”, a set of principles and constraints for Web computing which optimize desirable qualities including ease of development, robustness, and scalability. The term RESTful connotes adaptation of REST for particular computing situations such as geospatial Web services.

2.    Purpose of this Standards Working Group

The purpose of the RESTful Service Policy Standard Working Group is to create requirements, recommendations and examples for the creation of OGC standards for RESTful Web Services. The result of this work will be formalized in a Policy Standard for the structure and content of the implementation of geospatial standards embodying a uniform approach to RESTful principles.
The SWG will provide pragmatic and testable requirements with recommended guidelines and conventions for consistent RESTful OGC Services standards.

Note: Conventions for configuration patterns are essential to allow new developers and users to learn a service interface quickly.  It promotes uniformity and simplicity, as well as reducing errors which can impact interoperability

3.    Scope of Work

A large community of geospatial Web services stakeholders both within and outside of OGC is coming to recognize the value of REST principles for simplifying and unifying access to OGC services.  The scope of this Standards Working Group will be to look across all existing and planned OGC services and investigate how REST principles can be applied to access their capabilities leveraging uniform interface, hypermedia, and structured resource design patterns. In other words, the goal is to reach a consensus on how these principles can best be realized for OGC service users.
New and old applications require looking at the same data in many different ways.  One way in which OGC services have always been “special” is their emphasis on the importance and identity of the data behind the service interface. That same tiered pattern of data to service capability to client / user interaction will be important to reflect in an OGC – REST standards policy.
These advanced applications typically integrate several different service interfaces to provide the requested capability. Rather than requiring each application to perform repeated mediation between diverse standalone service bindings, one goal of this SWG will be to determine ways in which resource structures and uniform interface façade techniques can make this type of service integration a straightforward and easy to implement capability.
Candidate OGC Services to be considered for this type of harmonization will include WMS, WFS, WCS, SOS, SPS, WPS, CSW, WMTS, and profiles thereof.
Activities will include:

• Identify both common and distinct use cases for candidate services
• Identify mainstream IT and specialized concerns for RESTful OGC services
• Identify current software best practices
• Identify reusable design patterns
• Develop guidance regarding consequences of RESTful practices for geospatial interoperability
• Focus on HTTP/HTTPS protocol

3.1    What is out of scope?
This SWG will not try to codify RESTful service practice for the entire web, but will create a profile or adaptation of RESTful techniques specifically for OGC in order to provide a consistent design paradigm and practices across OGC Web Services. It will be desirable although not essential that these paradigms and practices coincide with many that are being developed and/or adopted in the wider Web services world.
In particular, the SWG will not engage in any discussion of “what REST is” in terms of:

• Semantics
• Other protocols such as XMPP…
• Definition of REST, ROA vs. SOA…

This SWG will specify policy for the development of RESTful bindings for current and emerging OGC service standards and guidance for the CITE SC on creation of tests for RESTful services. The SWG will not specify those bindings itself. The SWG’s work product will not constitute OGC policy until the TC has accepted the SWG’s contribution as policy.  Since the product of this SWG is a standard on how to write OGC RESTful services standards, a direct CITE conformance test will not be created.
3.2    Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The SWG will take into account the published and/or posted body of work on REST and RESTful Services in OGC project documents. In addition, the SWG will use at least the following external resources:

• ·       HTTP v. 1.1 specification (http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.txt)
• ·       HTTPbis work (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis)
• ·       Fielding Ph.D. Thesis: Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures (http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm)
• RESTful Web Services, Leonard Richardson and Sam Ruby, ©2007 O’Reilly Media
• RESTful Web Services Cookbook, Subbu Allamaraju, ©2010, Yahoo! Inc.  O’Reilly Media
• ·       REST in Practice: Hypermedia and Systems Architecture, Jim Weber, Savas Parastatidis, Ian Robinson, © 2010 Jim Weber, Savas Parastatidis and Ian Robinson
• Atom Syndication Format (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4287.txt)

3.3    Completion of the SWG’s Work
The RESTful Services Policy Standards Working Group will dissolve after the following milestones have been achieved:

1. The SWG has completed evaluation and incorporation into the candidate standard of all comments received during the OAB review and the public comment period;
2. The SWG membership has approved a recommendation to submit the document to the TC for consideration as an OGC Adopted Standard;
3. The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard;
4. A RESTful Services DWG has been formed to oversee the implementation of RESTful Services standards and to provide technical assistance where needed.

4.    Deliverables

The main deliverable of the SWG will be a policy standard describing how RESTful Web Services standards will be structured for OGC Web services.

• Requirements and guidelines for OGC RESTful Services document as Policy Standard
• User stories for candidate services (explanatory annexes to the above document)
• Additional informative guidance on both creation and implementation of RESTful service specifications.

At the end of the process to create and adopt the Policy document, the REST SWG will act as a seed group to create a RESTful DWG that oversees and provides technical guidance for development of RESTful OGC Web service implementation standards, scope also to include:

• Reference implementations
• CITE tests and testing process
• Client implementation best practices
• Interoperability Program activities related to RESTful Web services

5.    IPR Policy for this SWG

The IPR Policy for the SWG will be RAND, Royalty Free. In addition, the SWG will endeavor to make all of its work and deliberation available to OGC members as expeditiously as possible during our deliberations.
ý  RAND-Royalty Free. ¨ RAND for fee

6.    Anticipated Participants

The anticipated participants are those members of the Technical Committee who are currently interested in working on RESTful Web services. This would likely include the following groups:

• members of the REST SC;
• members of any SWG committee currently looking at creating a RESTful binding for their service, such as WFS, WMS, SPS, WPS, WCS, WCPS, WfCS, SOS, CSW or the GeoServices REST SWG;
• members of the OAB, the Architecture DWG;
• those who are or will be involved in the design, development, implementation, or use of RESTful Web Services, including RESTful service providers, prospective users of such services and content providers.

This is not meant as a limiting statement but instead is intended to provide guidance to interested potential participants as to whether they should consider participating in this SWG.

7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG

a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).
The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:

1. HTTP 1.1
2. Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. IETF RFC3986
3. OGC Identifiers – the case for http URIs. OGC 10-124r1

The SWG intends to seek and if possible maintain liaison with each of the organizations maintaining the above works.
b. Details of the first meeting
The first meeting of the SWG will be held by During the OGC TC meeting in Brussels the week of 28 November 2011. The particular time and location will be arranged as early as feasible. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.
c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
Example:
The work of the SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, every one or two weeks, with face-to-face meetings at each OGC TC meeting to the extent possible.
d. Supporters of the Proposal
The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately “opted-into” the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.

Name

Organization

Jerome Gasperi

CNES

Volker Mische

Couchbase

Simon Cox

CSIRO

Panagiotis (Peter) A. Vretanos

CubeWerx

Josh Lieberman

Deloitte LLP

Peter Schut

GeoConnections -  Natural Resources Canada

Clemens Portele

interactive instruments GmbH

 Philippe Duchesne

Intergraph Corporation

Arnulf Christl

Metaspatial

Don Sullivan

NASA

Jeff de La Beaujardiere

NOAA

John Herring

ORACLE

Eric Blasenheim

Pitney Bowes Business Insight

Pedro Goncalves

Terradue Srl 

Jeff Harrison

The Carbon Project

Aaron Braeckel

University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)

Steve H. L. Liang

University of Calgary

Pat Cappelaere

Vightel Corporation

e. Convener(s)
The convener of the first meeting will be John Herring of  Oracle.
The first order of business at that meeting will be to elect a permanent chair who will preside over the meeting after his election.The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to update the SensorML Version 1.0 Standard resulting in  a new Version.  The SWG will achieve this objective by evaluating and processing the Change Requests listed in the Charter while ensuring that the standard is consistent with the OGC baseline and business plan. 
This is the main page for the SensorML v2.0 standards working group. We will utilize this page and two other resources heavily:
(1) The items listed in the SWG's Issues Tracker shown as a tab on intenal version of this page
(2) Discussions by the SWG as recorded on the SensorML v2.0 TWIKI accessible on the top of the internal version of this page.
SWG members, please use the Issues Tracker for submitting and discussing actions on any CRs and other changes proposed. The TWIKI is available for more coherent presentation of ideas when necessary. These should be referenced from the Issues pages when appropriate.
To join the SWG, the first step is to become an observer using the link for the SWG on the Observer Agreements page.
 

 

1.    Sensor Model Language (SensorML) 1.2 SWG
This group has been renamed to SensorML 2.0 SWG.  All references to SensorML 1.2 SWG should now be considered SensorML 2.0 SWG.
 
2.    Purpose of the Standards Working Group
The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to update the SensorML Version 1.0 Standard and to develop Version 1.2. It will achieve this objective by evaluating and processing the Change Requests listed in Section 3, ensuring that the standard is consistent with the OGC baseline and business plan.
3.    Scope of Work
This SWG is focused on processing change requests to be included in the SensorML version 1.2. The Scope of Work (SOW) will be to collect all outstanding and planned Change Requests, evaluate each of these proposals, and edit the standard based on these Change Requests and related decisions of the SWG membership. This SWG will consider at least the following Change Request Proposals and discussion items:
 

• 07-101: Use more ISO Terms
• 07-132: Correct inconsistencies
• 08-127: GML 3.2 implementation
• 08-145: Improve inheritance
• 08-146: Improve interface specification
• 08-147: Separate SWE Common data models

Additional Change Requests may be addressed at the discretion of the SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources.
3.1       What is out of scope?
Only those change requests submitted through the formal process as identified in the Policy and Procedures will be addressed.  Therefore, any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.
3.2    Specific Existing Work Used as Starting Point
The starting point for the work will be Version 1.0.1 of the SensorML standard (OGC 07-000).
3.3    How to Determine when Work of SWG has been Completed
The following criteria will be used to determine the completion of this SWG:
A completed revision of Sensor Planning Service Standard documents have been produced and reviewed by the SWG and have been approved for submission to the TC for approval as an adopted standard.
4.    Description of deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:

• A final version of the SensorML V1.2 Standard documents for submission to the TC.
• Corresponding XML schemas associated with version 1.2 of the SensorML Standard documents.

The following schedule of activities is anticipated:
1)      Seek approval for formation of the SensorML SWG at the OGC TC held in Atlanta in September 15-18, 2008.
2)      Begin the organization and assignment of SWG work activities during the SensorML SWG ad-hoc session at the TC meeting in September 2008.
3)      Internal review of SensorML 1.2 initial release documents status during TC meeting in December 2008. This review will include initial evaluation of which proposed changes are not likely to be ready in time for inclusion in the version 1.2 initial release documents.
4)      Final version of the SensorML 1.2 documents completed at least three weeks prior to TC meeting in March 2009.
5)      SensorML V1.2 Standards documents submitted to the TC during the TC meeting in June 2009 for approval as version 1.2.
 
The above schedule is meant to serve as a guideline to the SWG in order to determine completion milestones.  However, based on the actual Change Requests, completion dates may be adjusted to accommodate critical updates to the documents.  Although all change requests will be addressed, some may be postponed due to the need to more quickly produce a document containing higher priority requests.
5.    IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free
6.    Anticipated Audience
The target audience of SensorML version 1.2 is any implementers and / or users of OGC SensorML standard or related SWE specifications.
7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work
The following standards may be relevant to this SWG's planned work:

• OGC SWE Common data model V1.1
• OGC SOS, SAS, and SPS services
• OGC GML 3.2
• OGC O&M
• OGC WPS
• ISO TC 211 suite
• XML Schema
• RelaxNG

c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of this SWG will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, with face-to-face meetings at each of the OGC TC meetings as defined by the chair. The teleconference calls are currently planned every one or two weeks. The concrete dates will be announced by the SWG.
d. Supporters of this Charter
The following persons support this SWG and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule.
 

Name

Organization

Mike Botts

University of Alabama in Huntsville

Alexandre Robin

Spot Image S.A.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
e. Convener
Mike Botts (University of Alabama in Huntsville)
 <-->In today’s world, most sensors have proprietary software interfaces defined by their manufacturers and used selectively. New APIs are requested and developed on an as needed basis, considering resource limitations and risk. This situation requires significant investment on the part of developers with each new sensor or project involving multiple systems and on the part of the providers of sensors, gateways and portals or services where observations are used.  Standardized interfaces for sensors in the Web of Things (WoT) and Internet of Things (IoT), two terms that are frequently used interchangeably, will permit the proliferation of new high value services with lower overhead of development and wider reach.  It will also lower the cost for sensor and gateway providers. 
Over the course of several workshops organized by the Open Geospatial Consortium to determine the application of its standards to IoT (http://www.ogcnetwork.net/IoT) it has been recommended that the OGC form a new standard working group (SWG).  The goal of the new Sensor Web for IoT SWG is to develop one or more standards based on existing WoT protocols while also leveraging the existing and proven OGC Sensor Web Enablement (SWE) family of standards.
OGC’s Sensor Web Enablement (SWE):  http://www.opengeospatial.org/domain/swe standards are the only ones that focus on the content of sensor information and on making the sensor observations useful to end user applications. SWE standards allow users to assessment the fitness for use of observations and to allow accurate processing on the sensed information to create derived information suitable to the users needs.
In much the same way that HTML and HTTP standards enabled the exchange of any type of information on the Web, the OGC SWE standards enable the discovery of sensors and corresponding observations, exchange, and processing of sensor observations, as well as the tasking of sensors and sensor systems. The figure below depicts middleware layers between device level and application level interfaces. Each layer needs a standard interface.

The formation of Sensor Web for IoT SWG was approved by the OGC membership with its first meeting in Seoul October 2012. The initial scope of the SWIOT SWG seeks to make observations captured by IoT devices easily available to applications and users through data aggregation portals. For more information about the SWIOT SWG, contact Steve Liang, University of Calgary, SWG Convener (steve [dot] liang [at] ucalgary [dot] ca)
Interested in having your organization participate and benefit from the SWIOT SWG? Join OGC. [link to http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/join/value] 
 
 
 
 
 
  
1.    ISO Simple Features
A Standard working group is being formed to work on the ISO version of the Simple Features specification. The intent is to create a fully harmonized standard so that the OGC and ISO standards and the SQL/MM Part 3 spatial versions are harmonized at the end of the work of the  SWG. A summary SWG description is given here and expanded below:

Name:

ISO 19125: Simple Features

Purpose:

Update the ISO 19125 (OGC) Simple Features standard to

• Maintain and correct the current standard

• Factor out independent modules such as:

o   Well known text
o   Well known binary
o   Spatial operators (9-DIM, Egenhofer, Clementini, RCC-8, RCC-16

• Synchronize with SQL/MM: Part 3 Spatial,

• Introduce new geometry types,

• Support 3D coordinates, and

• Linear reference systems including segmented attributes.

All documents submitted to a vote in OGC will also be submitted as an NWIP to ISO TC 211. No standard will be published by either ISO or OGC until both communities have approved the same version of the normative text.
 

IPR Policy:

Royalty free, RAND

Deliverables:

• Corrigendums for current Common Architecture and SQL Option, possibly factored, but maintain 1.1 conformance as core conformance tests (as given currently and in the past)

• Extensions for the new geometry types

• Extension for 3D and parameterized coordinate reference systems

• Extension of 3D coordinates

• Extensions for query for 3D geometries and linear reference systems

2.    Purpose of the Standards Working Group
The purpose of the ISO 19125 SWG will be to update the common standard that is both the OGC Simple Features Implementation Standard and the ISO 19125 Standards (Part 1: Common Architecture, and Part 2 SQL Option) to:

• Maintain and correct the current standard
• Synchronize with SQL/MM: Part 3 Spatial,
• Introduce new geometry types,
• Support 3D coordinates, and
• Linear reference systems including segmented attributes.

Note: It has been argued that merely re-writing the current version of Part 1 is a short-term expedient that does nothing to insure the harmonization of SFSQL, SQL/MM and GML. A position paper has been introduced by Paul Scarponcini that argues for a new Part 1 that can serve as a common Logical Model for these and other subsequent encoding standards. 
Therefore, the first order of business of this SWG should be to consider this position paper.
3.    Scope of Work
The scope of the Simple Features project is to define:
1.      An unrestricted feature model consistent with ISO 19109: Rules for application schema and ISO 19110: Methodology for feature cataloguing.
2.      A commonly agreed to layering of the geometries associated to ISO 19107: Spatial schema beginning with the simplest and adding complexity as the community matures, defining the minimal sets of geometric representations for use in the geographic information communities
This layering begins with 2D coordinate reference systems and extends into 3D systems and linear referencing systems. It begins with simple linear or planar interpolation algorithms, and then adds circular, conic and will eventually include complex spline functions (polynomial, rational, Bézier, NURBS).
Each level in this structure will be related to a conformance class. Each conformance class will be a platform for the ones above it and an extension of the ones below it. Emphasis will be on interoperability within a common conformance class but also include mechanisms for interoperability across conformance classes.
3.1    What is out of scope?
Any restrictions on other aspects of feature schemata are out of scope.
3.2    Existing Work as a Starting Point
This work will all derive from the ISO TC 211 body of work (ISO 191xx standards), from the OGC abstract specification and from the work in ISO/IEC JTC1 on Multimedia and Application Package extensions to SQL. More specifically, the following standards will be heavily referenced[1]:
From ISO TC 211 often in cooperation with OGC
ISO 19107:2003  Spatial schema
ISO 19109:2005  Rules for application schema
ISO 19110:2005  Methodology for feature cataloguing
ISO 19111:2007  Spatial referencing by coordinates
ISO 19111-2:2009  Spatial referencing by coordinates - Part 2: Extension for parametric value
ISO 19125-1:2004 Simple feature access - Part 1: Common architecture
ISO 19125-2:2004 Simple feature access - Part 2: SQL Option
ISO 19136: Geographic markup language (GML)
ISO 19148: Linear Referencing (currently in DIS)
From ISO/IEC JTC1 SC32 WG4
ISO/IEC 13249-3:2006 SQL multimedia and application packages -Part 3: Spatial
3.3         How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed
The work of the SWG will be done when all of the items in Clause 1 above have been incorporated in documents and those documents have been passed as standards by both ISO and OGC.
4.    Description of deliverables
This scope involves several activities, to maintain, correct and extend the current standards. This current specification consists of two parts:
Part 1: Common Architecture
Part 2: SQL Option
The deliverables for this SWG will consist of (at least):
1.      Corrigendums or new drafts for current Common Architecture and SQL Option
2.      Extensions for any items pulled from this earlier parts as a modularization mechanism, possibly including:
a.       Well-know text
b.      Geometric operations (boundary, convex hull, buffer, etc.)
c.       Boolean query operators such as the Egenhofer, Clementini, RCC 8, RCC 16, WithinDistance, etc.
3.      Extensions for the new geometry types, especially for those introduced in SQL/MM (ISO/IEC 13249-3:2006)
4.      Extension for 3D and parameterized coordinate reference systems, for consistency with ISO 19111
5.      Extensions for linear reference systems (ISO 19148)
6.      Extensions for query for 3D geometries and linear reference systems
This section describes what the deliverables will be for this SWG activity. Deliverables could be a revision to an existing standard, including revisions to schemas. A deliverable could also be a best practices document.
This section also includes a preliminary schedule of activities. For example, an RFC focused SWG schedule would provide a plan and schedule that includes the start date, target date for release of the candidate standard for public review, date for consolidation of comments, date for edits to document based on comments, and a final target date for making a recommendation to the Membership. This information will be made public and will be used as input to a RoadMap for the document. Therefore, the more detail the better.
5.    IPR Policy for this SWG
The IPR Policy for the Simple Feature SWG will be RAND and Royalty Free.
6.    Anticipated Audience
The primary audience for the Simple Feature standards will be anyone implementing common database, data storage or data transfer mechanisms designed for multiple application support. For this reason, the common Architecture facet of the SWG will concentrate on implementation-independent data content and representation-independent data access protocols. When a protocol or data structure is used, every effort will be made to choose one that is well accepted, easy to use and implementable by a wide variety of encodings such as SQL and GML.
Ease of use and ease of understanding will be the two most important requirements of the Simple Features work.
7.    Other informative information about the work of this SWG
7.1    Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).
The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:

• ISO 19107:2003 Spatial schema
• ISO 19125-1:2004 Simple feature access - Part 1: Common architecture
• ISO 19125-2:2004 Simple feature access - Part 2: SQL Option
• ISO 19136: Geographic markup language (GML)
• ISO/IEC 13249-3:2006 SQL multimedia and application packages -Part 3: Spatial

The SWG intends to seek and if possible maintain liaison with each of the organizations maintaining the above works. This will include ISO TC 211 and ISO/IEC JTC1 SC32 WG4
 
7.2    Details of the first meeting
The first meeting of the committee will be held by telephone conference call at -AM EDT on - May 2010. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting.
7.3    Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the committee will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, possibly every two weeks, with face-to-face meetings perhaps during each of the OGC TC meetings.
7.4    Supporters of the Proposal
 
The following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule.

John R. Herring

john [dot] herring [at] oracle [dot] com

Oracle America

Olivier Courtin

olivier [dot] courtin [at] oslandia [dot] com

Oslandia

Jan Herrmann

herrmanj [at] in [dot] tum [dot] de

Technische Universität München, Dept. of Informatics

Paul A. Birkel

pbirkel [at] mitre [dot] org

MITRE Corporation

 
7.5    Convener
Name of individual who started the SWG process. Could be the lead for an RFC submission, an OGC staff person or an individual who believes it is time for a revision to an adopted standard.
 

[1] Undated References mean that more than one version of a document may be used in different conformance classes
  
1.           Styled Layer Descriptor & Symbology Encoding SWG
Styled Layer Descriptor and Symbology Encoding 1.2 Standards Working Group
2.           Purpose of this Standard Working Group
The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to compile, discuss, and process all change requests that have been submitted to the OGC related to the SLD and SE standards and create a new version of both standards to fulfill new user needs (e.g. 3D portrayal, thematic mapping, ...).
The SWG will achieve this objective by evaluating and processing Change Requests listed in Section 3, ensuring that the standard is consistent with the OGC baseline and business plan.
After discussing the outstanding change requests, the SWG will make a final decision as to what new version numbers of SLD and SE must apply.
3.           Scope of Work
This SWG is focused on processing change requests related to revisions to the Style Layer Descriptor and Symbology Encoding standards.  The Scope of Work (SOW) will be to collect all outstanding Change Requests, evaluate each of these proposals, and make edits to the standard based on Change Requests and related decisions of the SWG membership.
The work of the SWG will be to consider at least the following Change Requests:
For SE:

• 07-105 SE Change request for thematic mapping

-         https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=25585

• 09-014 OWS-6 Symbology Encoding (SE) CR

-         https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=33517
-         https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=33515

• 09-043r1 Enhancements to Symbology Encoding in Support of IHO S-52 and UKHO AML

-         http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=33289&version=1
For SLD:

• 09-013 OWS-6 Styled Layer Descriptor (SLD) CR

-         https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=33518
-         https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=33516

• 08-064 SLD Profile of WMS CR

-         https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=28921
Additional Change Requests  are expected through the work of the WMS 1.4 SWG and may be addressed at the discretion of this SWG based on criticality of the change and available time and resources.
3.1       What is out of scope?
Only those change requests addressing the SLD Specification [OGC 05-078r4] and SE Specification [OGC 05-077r4] submitted through the formal process as identified in the OGC TC Policy and Procedures will be addressed.  Therefore, any items suggested through emails, vocal discussions, etc will be outside of the scope of this SWG until formally submitted.
3.2       Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for the work will be version 1.1.0 of the Style Layer Descriptor standard (OGC 05-078r4) and version 1.1.0 of the Symbology Encoding standard (OGC 05-077r4).  Additional existing work will include ISO 19117.
3.3       How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The following criteria will be used to determine the completion of the SWG:
1.       All Change Requests submitted prior to June 20, 2010 have been reviewed and evaluated to the satisfaction of the SWG.  This may include working the proposal, rejecting the proposal, or postponing the proposal to a later version.
2.       A completed revision of Style Layer Descriptor and Symbology Encoding Standards Documents has been produced and reviewed by the SWG and has been approved for submission to the TC for approval as an adopted standard.
3.       All comments have been addressed and the candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.
4.           Description of deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:
1.       A final version of the Style Layer Descriptor and Symbology Encoding Standards Documents for submission to the TC. 
2.       Corresponding schemas associated with version of the Style Layer Descriptor Standards and version of the Symbology Encoding document(s).
The following schedule of activities is anticipated:
1.       Begin the organization and assignment of work activities during the Styled Layer Descriptor & Symbology Encoding SWG kickoff meeting to be held during TC meetings December 2009.
2.       Preliminary review of version of the Style Layer Descriptor and version of the Symbology Encoding document(s) during TC meetings March 2010. This review will include initial evaluation of which proposed changes are not likely to be ready in time for inclusion in the next version.
3.       Final review of version of the Style Layer Descriptor and version of the Symbology Encoding document(s) during TC meetings June, 2010. This review will include final evaluation of which proposed changes are not likely to be ready in time for inclusion in version.
4.       Post completed version of the Styled Layer Descriptor & Symbology Encoding Standards document(s) at least three weeks prior to TC meetings March 2011.
5.       Standards document(s) submitted to the TC during the TC meetings March, 2011.
The above schedule is meant to serve as a guideline to the SWG in order to determine completion milestones.  However, based on the remaining Change Requests, the completion date may adjust in order to accommodate a critical update to the document(s).  Although all change requests will be addressed, some may be postponed due to the need to more quickly produce document(s) containing higher priority requests.
5.           IPR Policy for this SWG
? RAND-Royalty Free. 
6.           Anticipated Participants
The target audience of Style Layer Descriptor and Symbology Encoding is any implementers and / or users of OGC Styling Services.
7.           Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere). The following standards, documents and presentations may be relevant to the SWG's planned work and may be used as reference points in determining the work needed to provide the functionality anticipated by this committee's deliverables:
°          3D-Symbology Encoding Discussion Draft
http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=32904&version=1
°          Introduction to CR 07-105
https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=25584
°          ORCHESTRA Map and Design Service
https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=22684
°          ISO 19117 / SLD Harmonization
https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=30021
°          ISO 19117 Geographic Information Portrayal
https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=34357
°          OWS-6 Symbology Presentation (relates to the OWS CRs and ERs above)
https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=34356
°          Extending OGC styled layer descriptor for thematic cartography
https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=35767
http://www.geographie.uni-bonn.de/karto/Thematic-SLD.LBS-Telecarto2007.pdf
°          Towards Web Services Dedicated to Thematic mapping
http://www.osgeo.org/files/journal/v3/en-us/final_pdfs/ertz.pdf
b. Details of the first meetingThe first meeting of this SWG will be during the December 2009 TC Meetings in Mountain View, CA.
c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of this SWG will be carried out primarily by email, IRC meetings and conference calls, with face-to-face meetings at each of the OGC TC meetings as defined by the chair.  One IRC meeting  is currently planned each first Tuesday per month at 3:00 - 4:00 PM UTC Time.  This time may change based on participant availability.
 d. Supporters of the ProposalThe following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately "opted-into" the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed.

Name

Organization

 

Erwan Bocher

Institute for Research on Urban Sciences and Techniques

 

Reinhard Erstling

Interactive Instruments

 

Olivier Ertz

School of Business & Engineering Vaud Switzerland

 

Vincent Heurteaux

Geomatys SA

 

Christian Kiehle

lat/lon GmbH

 

Stan Tillman

Intergraph Corporation

 

Alvaro Zabala

Junta de Andalucía, Spain

 

Alexander Zipf

University of Bonn, Department of Geography

 

Craig Bruce

CubeWerx

 

 
 e. Convener(s)Olivier Ertz, School of Business & Engineering Vaud Switzerland
 
Acknowledgements. Thanks to OASIS for providing a template as the basis for defining the OGC SWG template.
 WaterML 2.0 Standards Working Group
WaterML 2.0 is a candidate Open Geospatial Consortium encoding standard for the representation of in-situ hydrological observations data. WaterML 2.0 is implemented as an application schema of the Geography Markup Language version 3.2.1 and makes use of the OGC Observations and Measurements (O&M) standard and the OMXML GML Application Schema.
OGC WaterML 2.0 will support encoding of hydrological and hydrogeological observation data in a variety of exchange scenarios. Example areas of usage are: exchange of data for operational monitoring and forecasting programs; supporting operation of infrastructure (e.g. dams, supply systems); exchange of observational and forecast data for surface water and groundwater; release of data for public dissemination; enhancing disaster management through data exchange; and exchange in support of national reporting.
A core aspect of OGC WaterML2.0 is the description of time series. Interpretation of time series data relies on understanding the nature of the process that generated them. OGC WaterML2.0 provides the framework under which time series data can be exchanged with appropriate metadata to allow correct machine interpretation and thus correct use for further analysis. Existing systems will be able to use this model as a conceptual bridge between existing schema or systems, allowing consistency of the data to be maintained.
The goal of WaterML 2.0, as outlined in “WaterML2.0: An O&M profile for water observations data” [OGC 10-126], is to provide an extensible schema derived from the OGC Standards Baseline to enable a higher level of interoperability for hydrologic time series data as required by potential adopters, including public water agencies, other organisations and universities.
NOTE: Earlier versions of WaterML (CUAHSI WaterML 1.0 and 1.1) have been implemented by many organizations, but were developed external to OGC and are not consistent with the OGC Standards Baseline.
 
 
Purpose of this Standards Working Group
The purpose of this Standards Working Group is to progress the candidate WaterML 2.0 standard (OGC 10-126r1) to the state of an adopted OGC Standard. This goal will be achieved by processing comments received during a public comment period and ensuring that the standard is consistent with the OGC Standards Baseline and Business Plan.
Scope of Work
This SWG is focused on the WaterML 2.0 candidate standard submission (OGC 10-126r1), coordinating a public comment period, and processing any comments received during this period. The final deliverable of the SWG will be a version of the candidate standard for consideration by the OGC membership for approval as an OGC standard.
What is out of scope?
While OGC standard services, such as SOS, are the preferred mechanism for exchanging information, WaterML 2.0 does not specify a specific transport mechanism or service interface. Interoperability experiments led by members of the HDWG are exploring data exchange using OGC services.
This SWG will not address harmonizing or defining vocabularies sets, such as observable properties, for use with WaterML2.0. The standard will define a number of URIs that will be used to convey the nature and state of observations, such as quality codes and data types with the aim of enhancing interoperability.
This SWG will focus only on processing comments received during the 30 day public comment period. Separately submitted Change Requests are out of scope, and will only be considered at the discretion of the SWG.
Specific Contribution of Existing Work as a Starting Point
The starting point for the work will be the draft WaterML 2.0 submission (OGC 10-126r1). This will be sent out for public comment following any edits required to meet candidate standard requirements.
How it is to be Determined when the Work of the SWG has been Completed?
The work of the SWG will be complete when:

• All comments submitted during the 30 day public comment period have been dealt with to the satisfaction of the SWG.
• The SWG approves the WaterML 2.0 Candidate Standard and ATS document, for submission to the TC for approval as an adopted standard.
• The candidate standard has been approved by the OGC Technical and Planning Committees as an Adopted OGC standard.

Description of deliverables
The following deliverables will result from the work of this SWG:

• An annotated list of all comments submitted during the 30 day public comment period, including the comment, submitter, rationale, comment type/priority, and the response of the SWG.
• A final version of the WaterML 2.0 Standard and ATS documents for submission to the TC.

In recognition of the amount of effort from a number of groups that has gone into developing WaterML2.0 to its current state, the SWG should conclude its activities no later than Q4 2011. As such the following schedule of activities is planned:

• SWG startup. 2011 March.
• OAB/ONA RFC review; SWG prepares candidate standard for vote for public release. 2011 March
• SWG votes to release WaterML 2.0 for public comment. 2011 April
• OGC staff develops PR and announces availability for public comment. 2011 April
• 30-day public comment period. 2011 April - 2011 May
• SWG collects and collates comments into a single document. 2011 May
• SWG discusses and votes on comments and makes resulting edits towards final WaterML 2.0 candidate standard. 2011 June
• SWG votes to approve release of WaterML 2.0 candidate standard for approval as an OGC adopted standard. 2011 June
• 60 day IPR review period and associated TC e-vote to approve WaterML 2.0 candidate standard as an OGC adopted standard. 2011 July – 2011 August

IPR Policy for this SWG
RAND-Royalty Free.
Anticipated Participants
The target audience/participants of WaterML 2.0 includes: application developers; GIS and hydrologic software vendors; the hydrologic research and education community; international, national and local water-related agencies that set standards for, distribute and use hydrologic and hydrogeologic observation data; and the consumer.
Development of WaterML2.0 to date has been undertaken by the following OGC members:
a) CSIRO
b) San Diego Supercomputer Center
c) Australian Bureau of Meteorology
d) KISTERS AG
e) USGS
f) NOAA
g) Service Centre Information Technology of the BMVBS (DLZ-IT BMVBS)
h) disy Informationssysteme GmbH
i) German Federal Institute of Hydrology
j) Office International de L'eau- Sandre
k) Deltares
 
l) Geological Survey of Canada, Natural Resources Canada
 
 
It is envisaged that these organization, at least, will participate in the SWG.
Other informative information about the work of this SWG
a. Similar or applicable standards work (OGC and elsewhere).The following standards and projects may be relevant to the SWG's planned work, although none currently provide the functionality or domain focus anticipated by this committee's deliverables:
10-126r1 WaterML2.0: An O&M Profile for Water Observation Data (Draft)
09-124r2 - Harmonising Standards for Water Observation Data - Discussion Paper
OGC Observations and Measurements 2.0, OGC AS Topic 20 (also ISO DIS 19156:2010)
OGC Geography Markup Language v3.2 (also ISO 19136:2007)
OGC Observations and Measurements XML (OMXML) Encoding Standard
The SWG intends to seek and if possible maintain liaison with each of the organizations maintaining the above works.
b. Details of the first meetingThe first meeting of the committee will be held at the February/March 2011 OGC Technical Committee meeting in Bonn, Germany. Call-in information will be provided to the SWG's e-mail list and on the portal calendar in advance of the meeting. The main items of business will be to select (co-)chair(s) for the SWG, and the primary editor for the standard, and agree on a schedule of work, including regular meetings if required. c. Projected on-going meeting schedule
The work of the committee will be carried out primarily by email and conference calls, every other week, with face-to-face meetings at each of the OGC TC meetings. Other face to face meetings may be called if this can expedite the work of the SWG. d. Supporters of the ProposalThe following people support this proposal and are committed to the Charter and projected meeting schedule. These members are known as SWG Founding or Charter members. Once the SWG is officially activated, this group is immediately “opted-into” the SWG and have voting rights from the first day the SWG is officially formed. Extend the table as necessary.

Name

Organization

Peter Taylor

CSIRO

David Lemon

CSIRO

Ilya Zaslavsky

SDSC/CUAHSI

Stefan Fuest

KISTERS

Paul Sheahan

Australian Bureau of Meteorology

John Halquist

NOAA

Simon Jirka

52°North

Boyan Brodaric

Geological Survey of Canada, Natural Resources Canada

Peter Gijsbers

Deltares

David Briar

USGS

Sven Tschirner

German Federal Institute of Hydrology

 
 
 
Bibliography
 IETF RFC 2616, Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1. (June 1999)
ISO 8601:2004, Data elements and interchange formats — Information interchange —Representation of dates and times.
ISO 19101:2002. Geographic information -- Reference model
ISO 19107:2003, Geographic Information — Spatial schema.
ISO 19111:—1), Geographic Information — Spatial referencing by coordinates.
OGC 07-136, OGC Geography Markup Language
OGC 10-004r3, OGC Observations and Measurements v2.0
OGC 00-014r1, Guidelines for Successful OGC Interface Specifications
OGC Document 08-095r5 - Hydrology Domain Working Group Charter, , 26th April 2008 updated 2 OGC Document 07-041r1 WaterML (OGC Discussion Paper)
OGC Document 10-126r1 WaterML2.0: An O&M Profile for Water Observation Data (OGC Implementation Profile)
OGC Document 09-124r2 - Harmonising Standards for Water Observation Data (OGC Discussion Paper)
WMO-168: Guide to Hydrological Practices, Sixth edition, 2008.