Discovery Planning

Abstract/Agenda: 

In this joint Earth Science Collaboratory (ESC) and Discovery Cluster session, we will discuss and plan the direction of the Discovery Cluster for the coming year. With multiple Earth science data centers already implementing these Discovery services, a forum is needed to discuss planning, interoperability, community process issues for the Discovery services.

 

Draft DCP-3: Where do we go from here? (25-minutes, Brian Wilson)

Faceting and Custom Fields Discussion (25-minutes, Eric Rozell)

Some Lessons Learned from Apache Solr-based Faceting (10-minutes, Hook Hua)

  • Want to identify and apply some lessons learned on faceting.

Any Other Topics for Discovery? (~10-minutes)

  • Should collect and prioritize list of Discovery-related topics to address.
  • Should coordinate with needs of other clusters. e.g. ESC.
  • Future topics and DCPs
    • Client developments
    • Server developments
    • Response formats
      • RSS
      • JSON
    • Uniform error-handling

Leveraging the Discovery Testbed (20-minutes, Hook Hua & Christine White)

 

Notes: 

 

Key Topics

XLink for OpenSearch Response specification (James Gallagher)

We should use XLink (a W3C standard) to specify "roles" and "types" of <link> tags.

Draft DCP-3: Where do we go from here?

Likely replaced by a new DCP for xlink.

Faceting and Custom Fields Discussion

There are three main use cases for custom fields:

  1. Valid parameter values
  2. Coupling parameters with user interface "widgets"
  3. Faceted browsing

Should we follow the typical Discovery cluster approach, "the simplest thing needed right now" or use something that is more extensible to future use cases?

Some Lessons Learned from Apache Solr-based Faceting

Why do we revert to Solr when we have OpenSearch services and specifications?

OpenSearch and the Discovery specification has some capabilities needed for faceting, but not all.

Leveraging the Discovery Testbed

Will be implementing a Discovery testbed based on the GeoPortal Server.

Seeking input on requirements, development, population and testing from the cluster.

Contributions

XLink for OpenSearch Response specification (James Gallagher)

(Brian) Should you use the xlink:href? - No, you don't have to according to the W3C specification.

What's the purpose of the MIME type? - MIME type is still used to describe the response.

(Brian) Can we still cover both esip:subRel and esip:serviceProtocol attributes using XLink? - Yes, in XLink we can use both xlink:role and xlink:arcRole.

Has anyone seen xlink attributes used in the Atom spec? Is there potential conflict between mass market tools who have defined their own semantics for XLink tags? - There shouldn't be.

(Eric) You have to use the "simple" xlink:type

Draft DCP-3: Where do we go from here? (25-minutes, Brian Wilson)

Probably being replaced by DCP-4 (xlink specification). Not much discussion.

Faceting and Custom Fields Discussion (25-minutes, Eric Rozell)

Solr can use any response format.

Some Lessons Learned from Apache Solr-based Faceting (10-minutes, Hook Hua)

Should we come up with a DCP for JSON and what does that JSON look like? - Why not just use the Solr JSON response?

Leveraging the Discovery Testbed (20-minutes, Hook Hua & Christine White)

A poll was passed around to see who would participate, and to what extend (e.g., development, testing, population, etc.)

Other

Original Notes

Actions: 

 

Action Items

  • Brian will write DCP-4 based on xlink attributes.
  • Brian or NSIDC will write DCP-5 about valid parameters
  • Hook or someone? will define a Solr-like response
Citation:
Hua, H.; Lynnes, C.; Discovery Planning; Winter Meeting 2012. ESIP Commons , February 2012