Meeting Agenda
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes of previous mtg
4. IEEE Patent Policy
5. Overview of SAR Processing History Metadata
6. Discussion of scope and organization of the present standard
7. Other Business
8. Future Meetings
9. Adjourn
Minutes of SAR Metadata Std Working Group Meeting
August 23, 2018
1. Call to order
attendees:
Leland Pierce
Nicholas Orlando
SiriJodha Khalsa
Wade Schwartzkopf
Naresh K. Mallenahalli
Kevin Romero
Betty Evans
Alexander Awuviri
Marielle Chabot
We have a Quorum.
2. Approval of agenda
2.1. Is there a motion for approval of the agenda? Kevin
2.2. Is there a second? Betty
2.3. Is there discussion? none
2.4. Is there any opposition? none
2.5. motion passed
3. Approval of minutes of previous meeting
3.1. Is there a motion for approval of the minutes? Betty
3.2. Is there a second? Naresh
3.3. Is there discussion? none
3.4. Is there any opposition? none
3.5. motion passed
4. IEEE Patent Policy
4.1. slides 1-4 were shown and discussed by the chair
4.2. Chair provided an opportunity for participants to identify patent
claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent
claim(s)/patent application claim(s) of which the participant is
personally aware and that may be essential for the use of that
standard.
4.3. responses: none
5. Overview of SAR Processing History Metadata
comments:
1. Should observational context be captured?
This will be captured in another section
2. ISO 19115_2:
Should review ISO 19115_1. It incorporates _2 and is more recent.
Perhaps too generic but could create an implementation profile.
3. SICD
Focused on Level 1 data.
Section 4.1, Table 3-1, has image creation steps.
SIDD is another NGA format that handles higher level data, which
we plan to borrow from for this std.
4. SpatialTemporal
Being defined now.
Minimal data, cloud ready, easy for computers to process and
create, maybe not extensive enough for us.
Added Provenance examples into presentation.
Requirements for SAR Provenance metadata standard
5. Cover SLC level first but be extensible to cover other levels
6. Create an implementation profile to guide implementation and make
the use of the standard more consistent.
7. SiriJodha to find contact for SpatialTemporal standard.
8. Should Faraday Rotation Correction be in the metadata? yes.
9. Since Provenance includes “who” did what, not just what, need to
have something to allow for that at each step of the way.
10. Need to make sure that the standard we come up with needs little or
no human intervention, or it will be too hard to use.
11. STAC is workingo n something related… cloud based. Perhaps we
should collaborate with them.
12. Prov std from w3c: working with OGC on a spceific “eo-prov” that
may be the kind of thing we need. Should Ask George Percivall.
13. Betty’s list of requirements:
a. cover all processing levels
b. history of data ownership
c. easy for automation
d. cloud-ready
14. suggested that we survey users of current SAR metadata stds to get
their view of the good, bad, etc
15. Have we missed any relevant standards?
16. Need to avoid having too much detail in the processing metadata
17. Profiles and extensions of existing ISO standards are possible
18. We need to engage with industry better, and the europeans.
19. what about the folks doing “nanosar”? include them?
6. Discussion of scope and organization of current std
no comments
7. Other business?
Possible workshop to discuss sar metadata stds this fall?
8. Next meeting
Our next meeting will be:
Thursday Sept 20, 2018, 10AM US Eastern tiume
9. Adjourn
9.1. Is there a motion to Adjourn? Betty
9.2. Is there a second? SiriJodha
9.3. Is there discussion? none
9.4. Is there any opposition? none
9.5. motion passes