RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hydro.dwg] json waterml2 / timeseriesml?

Ø  that includes key waterml2 domain details that are not included in TimeseriesML as an informative annex.

I’d rather keep those extra WaterML2.0 domain details handled in the HydroDWG (thus WaterML2.0 line) unless

-          they are very generic (not so waterish afte rall)

-          we just have 1 or 2 of them (to avoir proliferation of specs as well)

If we end-up with having no need for creating water specific Class & al. what we could do would rather be turn WaterML2.0 Part 1 – TimeSeries into a Best Practice document explaining how to use TSML for quantitative water data.
That’s exactly the road the Water Quality IE will suggest : everything covered in OMS, no need for extra-formal specs rather document how to use it for Water Quality Data to ease the uptake.

Sylvain

De : Blodgett, David L <dblodgett@usgs.gov>
Envoyé : jeudi 13 juin 2024 19:34
À : Rob Atkinson <ratkinson@ogc.org>; Kyle Onda <konda@lincolninst.edu>
Cc : Grellet Sylvain <S.Grellet@brgm.fr>; Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org; Schaaf, Hylke van der <hylke.vanderschaaf@iosb.fraunhofer.de>; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org) <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>; Simon Cox <scox@ogc.org>
Objet : RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hydro.dwg] json waterml2 / timeseriesml?

Thanks for the dialogue on this. Turns out similar questions are floating around in a few places.

Whatever we come up with should be portable between custom APIs, OGC-API EDR (Position and Locations), STA, and the forthcoming OGC-API CONSYS part 2.

I _think_ that we should probably pursue a basic (focus on ease of use and adoptability in preference to edge case support) json-schema for timeseriesML that includes key waterml2 domain details that are not included in TimeseriesML as an informative annex.

Dave

From: Rob Atkinson <ratkinson@ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson@ogc.org>>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 11:20 AM
To: Kyle Onda <konda@lincolninst.edu<mailto:konda@lincolninst.edu>>
Cc: Grellet Sylvain <S.Grellet@brgm.fr<mailto:S.Grellet@brgm.fr>>; Blodgett, David L <dblodgett@usgs.gov<mailto:dblodgett@usgs.gov>>; Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org>; Schaaf, Hylke van der <hylke.vanderschaaf@iosb.fraunhofer.de<mailto:hylke.vanderschaaf@iosb.fraunhofer.de>>; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>) <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>; Simon Cox <scox@ogc.org<mailto:scox@ogc.org>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hydro.dwg] json waterml2 / timeseriesml?




 This email has been received from outside of DOI - Use caution before clicking on links, opening attachments, or responding.


+1 for not proliferating.

The way we could address this is add TimeseriesML/WaterML examples to the existing APIs and test using the Building Blocks.

Note Building Blocks can also perform and test transformations (of examples - its about testing specifications).

They also support cross-compiling across OpenAPI versions - noting ConnectedSystems has decided to aim for OAS 3.1 but other OGC APIs are at OAS 3.0 - we are solving this by a transpilation function to allow common elements to be shared on different versions - its far better to aim at current versions of JSON-schema than OAS 3.0 which has hacked a very old version...

so not proliferating requires a degree of sophistication in how components are designed for reusability.  This is where the OGC COSI team is able to support, but we need the domain experts identifying requirements and developing realistic test cases, implementations and ultimately testing at scale with deployments.

Rob Atkinson
Senior Research Engineer  | Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
Mobile: +61 419 202973
ratkinson@ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson@ogc.org> | ogc.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/ogc.org/__;!!KbSiYrE!n_chQWkG0m5feRnrxoXQRdM9EoZUKCQVeFw_yGqLl2ZRoYBQ8jX8VScy0BP3hdcuRbh4jP3lzCtN4zPGKoCz$> | @opengeospatial


[https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=99287]
Sign up for OGC News<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/ogc.us4.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=704e02f81107a6caab1568067&id=4e4528fd9d__;!!KbSiYrE!n_chQWkG0m5feRnrxoXQRdM9EoZUKCQVeFw_yGqLl2ZRoYBQ8jX8VScy0BP3hdcuRbh4jP3lzCtN44JNtwgN$>


On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 1:44 AM Kyle Onda <konda@lincolninst.edu<mailto:konda@lincolninst.edu>> wrote:
I think a waterml2 JSON encoding, which could be an output format for hydro-relevant STA or EDR (or any other extant and future API specs) endpoints makes more sense than a new API.


[A blue and green logo    Description automatically generated]
Kyle Onda, PhD
Director, Internet of Water
Center for Geospatial Solutions <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.cgsearth.org/__;!!KbSiYrE!n_chQWkG0m5feRnrxoXQRdM9EoZUKCQVeFw_yGqLl2ZRoYBQ8jX8VScy0BP3hdcuRbh4jP3lzCtN4yNr8Y9I$>
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
303 550 4432
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Pronouns: he/him

Please note our business hours are Monday through Thursday, 8 am to 6 pm ET. With some exceptions, emails sent on Fridays will be addressed the following week.


From: Hydro.dwg <hydro.dwg-bounces+konda=lincolninst.edu@lists.ogc.org<mailto:lincolninst.edu@lists.ogc.org>> on behalf of Grellet Sylvain via Hydro.dwg <hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org>>
Date: Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 11:41 AM
To: Rob Atkinson <ratkinson@ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson@ogc.org>>, Blodgett, David L <dblodgett@usgs.gov<mailto:dblodgett@usgs.gov>>
Cc: Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org> <hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org>>, Schaaf, Hylke van der <hylke.vanderschaaf@iosb.fraunhofer.de<mailto:hylke.vanderschaaf@iosb.fraunhofer.de>>, SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>) <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>, Simon Cox <scox@ogc.org<mailto:scox@ogc.org>>
Subject: Re: [Hydro.dwg] json waterml2 / timeseriesml?

Does a Timeseries API also make sense - or does STA or EDR cover all requirements?

I’ll let Hylke & Kathi complement but the way I see it is the following

ST API 2.0 is OMS compliant

My guts feeling is that TSML will end up 90% (or more) OMS compliant

There is a high chance ST API covers (dunno for EDR)

If the above is correct : I would suggest trying to reduce the entropy for the external world and not add yet another API. Otherwise for those not following all our internal OGC groups discussion, what the API to implement will be more and more complex.

My 2 €
Sylvain



De : Rob Atkinson <ratkinson@ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson@ogc.org>>
Envoyé : jeudi 13 juin 2024 17:30
À : Blodgett, David L <dblodgett@usgs.gov<mailto:dblodgett@usgs.gov>>
Cc : Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org>; Simon Cox <scox@ogc.org<mailto:scox@ogc.org>>; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>) <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
Objet : Re: [Hydro.dwg] json waterml2 / timeseriesml?

There is a functional OGC Building Block for the Observations and Measurements model as Features here:

https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogcapi-sosa<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/opengeospatial/ogcapi-sosa__;!!KbSiYrE!m10Fc0eL5fJQIQ6s8LmFxL6rrLEQCDf3UEaCq3k510Xw6QJcJI4QtQ8XqLBN9QrTU66zxOeJMW4zK_GorA$>

This is being co-developed with the SSN/SOSA update to match the new OMS specification.

can spin up customised profiles of these easily - e.g.

https://ogcincubator.github.io/bblocks-examples/bblock/ogc.bbr.examples.observation.vectorObservationFeature<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/ogcincubator.github.io/bblocks-examples/bblock/ogc.bbr.examples.observation.vectorObservationFeature__;!!KbSiYrE!m10Fc0eL5fJQIQ6s8LmFxL6rrLEQCDf3UEaCq3k510Xw6QJcJI4QtQ8XqLBN9QrTU66zxOeJMW5FeQQS9w$>


there are also experiments and activities to explore how common we can make domain models with different APIs for different packaging of observations, including OGC API EDR, SensorThingsAPI and ConnectedSystemsAPI.

So I think there may be a number of alternative encodings required, depending on which API to serve them, but some commonalities we can factor out as BuildingBlocks.

Does a Timeseries API also make sense - or does STA or EDR cover all requirements?

Rob Atkinson
Senior Research Engineer  | Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
Mobile: +61 419 202973
ratkinson@ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson@ogc.org> | ogc.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/ogc.org/__;!!KbSiYrE!m10Fc0eL5fJQIQ6s8LmFxL6rrLEQCDf3UEaCq3k510Xw6QJcJI4QtQ8XqLBN9QrTU66zxOeJMW5K_TD6Ew$> | @opengeospatial


Sign up for OGC News<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/ogc.us4.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=704e02f81107a6caab1568067&id=4e4528fd9d__;!!KbSiYrE!m10Fc0eL5fJQIQ6s8LmFxL6rrLEQCDf3UEaCq3k510Xw6QJcJI4QtQ8XqLBN9QrTU66zxOeJMW6eGMtr4Q$>


On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 12:36 AM Blodgett, David L via Hydro.dwg <hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org>> wrote:
Hi All –

In conversation today, the topic of a json encoding of WaterML2 or TimeseriesML came up. Is anyone aware of progress on such a thing? Seems like someone must have done something like that even as an ad-hoc experiment. Is there a world where we could establish a json encoding for hydrologic timeseries data?

Thanks.

Dave
_______________________________________________
You may visit our Privacy Policy at http://www.opengeospatial.org/privacy<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.opengeospatial.org/privacy__;!!KbSiYrE!m10Fc0eL5fJQIQ6s8LmFxL6rrLEQCDf3UEaCq3k510Xw6QJcJI4QtQ8XqLBN9QrTU66zxOeJMW6TU6Ow1g$>.
Hydro.dwg mailing list
Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org<mailto:Hydro.dwg@lists.ogc.org>
You may also unsubscribe or manage your OGC public list subscriptions at
 https://lists.ogc.org/mailman/listinfo/hydro.dwg<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.ogc.org/mailman/listinfo/hydro.dwg__;!!KbSiYrE!m10Fc0eL5fJQIQ6s8LmFxL6rrLEQCDf3UEaCq3k510Xw6QJcJI4QtQ8XqLBN9QrTU66zxOeJMW6Vdj2VfQ$>