Data model ddwg update
Download
1 / 37

Data Model & DDWG Update - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 121 Views
  • Uploaded on

Data Model & DDWG Update. Management Council Face-to-Face Flagstaff, Arizona August 22-23, 2011. Topics. Design Process Builds Calendar Build 1b Review Issues. Data Standards Design Process. "Build". What exactly has to happen?. "Build". Freeze the Information Model. "Build".

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Data Model & DDWG Update ' - errol


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Data model ddwg update

Data Model & DDWG Update

Management Council Face-to-Face

Flagstaff, Arizona

August 22-23, 2011


Topics
Topics

  • Design Process

  • Builds

  • Calendar

  • Build 1b Review Issues



Build
"Build"

  • What exactly has to happen?


Build1
"Build"

  • Freeze the Information Model


Build2
"Build"

  • Freeze the Information Model

    • Finalize the System

    • Generate Schema

    • Freeze the Document Set


Build3
"Build"

  • Freeze the Information Model

    • Finalize the System

    • Generate Schema

    • Freeze the Document Set

      • Introduction

      • Concepts Document

      • Glossary

      • Jump Start

      • Data Provider's Handbook

      • Standards Reference

      • Dictionary Tutorial

      • Data Dictionary

      • Example Set


Build4
"Build"

  • Freeze the Information Model

    • Finalize the System

    • Generate Schema

    • Freeze the Document Set

      • Introduction

      • Concepts Document

      • Glossary

      • Jump Start

      • Data Provider's Handbook

      • Standards Reference

      • Dictionary Tutorial

      • Data Dictionary

      • Example Set

  • Reasonably Stable


Build5
"Build"

  • Freeze the Information Model

    • Finalize the System

    • Generate Schema

    • Freeze the Document Set

      • Introduction

      • Concepts Document

      • Glossary

      • Jump Start

      • Data Provider's Handbook

      • Standards Reference

      • Dictionary Tutorial

      • Data Dictionary

      • Example Set

  • Reasonably Stable

Generated


Build6
"Build"

  • Freeze the Information Model

    • Finalize the System

    • Generate Schema

    • Freeze the Document Set

      • Introduction

      • Concepts Document

      • Glossary

      • Jump Start

      • Data Provider's Handbook

      • Standards Reference

      • Dictionary Tutorial

      • Data Dictionary

      • Example Set

  • Reasonably Stable

Generated

Human Intervention


Build7
"Build"

  • What this translates to is "lead time".

  • Right now we're looking at two to three weeks lead time from "freeze the model" to "flip the switch" on the build.

  • Let's look at a calendar.






Objects on the calendar are closer than they appear
Objects on the CalendarAre Closer Than They Appear


Internal review issues
Internal Review Issues

  • 1b Review produced > 200 separate issues/comments

  • Issues fell into two broad categories:

    • Documentation issues - clarity, consistency, completeness, integration.

    • Concerns about the model contents & implementation.

  • The Status of the review issues fall into two categories:

    • Open

    • Closed


Internal review issues1
Internal Review Issues

Open

  • Still working for Build 2.

  • Will address after Build 2.

  • Have not decided whether or not to implement.

    Closed

  • We have implemented.

  • Model related issue arose from misunderstanding some aspect of PDS4.

  • We disagree:

    • Incompatible with PDS4 requirements.

    • Incompatible with the model approach we're using.

    • Not possible to implement within our time & budget constraints.


Internal review some closed issues
Internal Review Some Closed Issues

Implemented

  • Document set integration.

  • Need analogs for PDS3 spreadsheet & container.

    Misunderstanding

  • New Structures don't support qubes.

  • Volatile metadata in a static archive (redelivery issue).

    Disagree

  • Labels that describe multiple data objects don't really work.

  • Do away with character tables.

  • Other space science archives: Consider using VOTABLE, CDM & OPeNDAP approach, class="variable" & named "dimension".


Internal review some open issues
Internal Review Some Open Issues

  • Documentation issues – still working many of them.

  • Need robust, global metadata.

  • New Structures don't support some EDRs, Telemetry, DSN data.

  • Use a standard bundle entry (bundle index.html)

  • Consider a nomenclature review.

  • There is a proposed alternate XML implementation

    • Starts with XML Schema 1.0 or 1.1?

  • Perceived complexity.

  • Too many subclasses.


Open issue too many subclasses 1
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (1)

  • Going back to the original reviews, the issue is for the number of variations expanded from the four base structural types. The underlying concerns are overhead and confusion.

  • There have been a lot of changes since build 1b. Now as we look at this issue we have to ask three questions.

    • What do we count?

    • Are there too many?

    • If the numbers are reasonable, do we have the right ones?


Open issue too many subclasses 2
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (2)

  • What do we count?

    • Count what the data providers and end users see.


Open issue too many subclasses 3
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (3)

  • What do we count?

    • Count what the data providers and end users see.

      • Schema – specifically the Product_* schema.


Open issue too many subclasses 4
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (4)

  • What do we count?

    • Count what the data providers and end users see.

  • We have 40 Product schema. Wait for it …


Open issue too many subclasses 5
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (5)

  • 40 Product schema – by function.

    • Aggregations – 2 (Probably will be 3)


Open issue too many subclasses 6
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (6)

  • 40 Product schema – by function.

    • Aggregations – 2

    • Observational Data – 10 (probably will add 1 or 2)


Open issue too many subclasses 7
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (7)

  • 40 Product schema – by function.

    • Aggregations – 2

    • Observational Data – 10

    • Observational Support – 10 (e.g., browse, document)


Open issue too many subclasses 8
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (8)

  • 40 Product schema – by function.

    • Aggregations – 2

    • Observational Data – 10

    • Observational Support – 10

    • Context – 5


Open issue too many subclasses 9
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (9)

  • 40 Product schema – by function.

    • Aggregations – 2

    • Observational Data – 10

    • Observational Support – 10

    • Context – 5

    • Operations – 13 (includes 5 PDS3

      Context)


Open issue too many subclasses 10
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (10)

  • 40 Product schema – by function.

    • Aggregations – 2

    • Observational Data – 10

    • Observational Support – 10

    • Context – 5

    • Operations – 13

  • Providers see 27, end users see 22.


Open issue too many subclasses 11
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (11)

  • Are there too many?

  • Comparing to PDS3 tends to be an apples and oranges situation, but the number of

    • PDS4 observational data products is roughly equivalent to the corresponding subset of PDS3 Data Objects.

    • PDS4 context products is roughly equivalent to the corresponding subset of PDS3 Catalog Objects.

    • PDS4 observational data support products is substantially greater than the corresponding subset of PDS3 Data Objects.


Open issue too many subclasses 12
Open Issue: Too many Subclasses (12)

  • Do we have the correct set?

    • We're close, but will probably add and subtract a few.

    • May be significantly affected by the potential change in the XML Schema implementation.




Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements*

Peter Allan

David Heather

Michel Gangloff

Santa Martinez

Thomas Roatsch

Alain Sarkissian

Ed Bell

Richard Chen

Dan Crichton

Amy Culver

Patty Garcia

Ed Grayzeck

Ed Guinness

Mitch Gordon

Sean Hardman

Lyle Huber

Steve Hughes

Chris Isbell

Steve Joy

Ronald Joyner

Debra Kazden

Todd King

Joe Mafi

Mike Martin

Thomas Morgan

Lynn Neakrase

Paul Ramirez

Anne Raugh

Mark Rose

Elizabeth Rye

Boris Semenov

Dick Simpson

Susie Slavney

* Anyone who sat through a DDWG 2-hour telecon or provided useful input.


Pds4 documents and their relationships
PDS4 Documentsand their Relationships

references

references

derive

generates

Big Picture

instruct

generates

Introduction to

PDS4 Documentation

PDS4 Information

Model Specification

Registry

Configuration File

Data Dictionary

Data Dictionary

Tutorial

Data Provider’s

Handbook

PDS4

Product Labels

XML Schemas

Standards

Reference

Concepts

Document

Jumpstart

Glossary

Registry

generates

Requirements

User Friendly

Product Tracking and Cataloging

creates /

validates

generates

Requirements

Engineering Specification

Definitions

Blueprints

Object Descriptions

Deliverables

configures

Legend

Complete

Cookbook

Some TBD

Informative


Information Modeling Tool

Requirements & Domain Knowledge

PDS4 Information Model and Generated Documents

PDS4 Information Model

PDS4 Data Dictionary (ISO/IEC 11179)

Filter and Translator

Information Model Specification

Registry Configuration Parameters

PDS4 Data Dictionary

(Doc and DB)

XML Schema

(Specific)

Query Models

XML Schema

(Generic)

XMI/UML

XML Document (Label)


ad