Report from the Data Management Technical Advisory Group: DM-TAG Members: Ken Casey, Edward Armstrong, Helen Beggs, Craig Donlon, Robert Evans, Chelle Gentemann, Andy Harris, Pierre Leborgne, Jean-Francois Piolle, Richard Reynolds, Doug May, Bruce Mackenzie, Peter Cornillon

Accomplishments Revision GDS-1.7 –Level 4 specifications –Level 2P specifications NASA ROSES 2007 call targeting use of GHRSST data Discussion on Level 3 specifications (led by Ken Casey) and based on Pierre LeBorgne’s document. Addition of “Data Access Tutorial” written by Ken Casey. Accessible through both LSTRF and GDAC web sites. Formation of SSES working group Data Policy Draft Document

LEVEL 3 discussions Initiated based on paper by Pierre LeBorgne MERSEA IP Marine Environment and Security for the European Area - Integrated Project Implementation of a fine scale SST analysis over the Atlantic Ocea P. Le Borgne, A. Marsouin, F. Orain and H. Roquet (Météo-France, DP/CMS) A. Coat and Y. Guichoux (Actimar)

Level 3 issues: continued Several issues of discussion raised. Major topics include: · Filenaming conventions · Collated and super collated data sets · Origins of L3 products · Gridded versus swath products · More later as these discussions develop

CF Issues Discussions with Steve Hankin on CF specifications driven by GHRSST (led by Edward Armstrong). Issues raised by Steve Hankin include: –No major show stoppers, main issues appear to be no explicit standard for codes in CF and incorporation of swath data. One goal of the meeting is to write a report to Steve Hankin on needs of GHRSST with respect to CF standards. –Eg: Ed Armstrong had a discussion with CF developers to add time_offset to COARDS attributes. –Area for discussion? How do we move forward with this? What is the process for petitioning the CF for new attributes? Who is the right person? –Ed Armstrong petitioned CF community to submit CF/COARDS to the NASA Standards Process Group

CONTINUED Official letter endorsing the integration of the GDAC into the Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center (PO.DAAC). Endorsement came from the PO.DAAC User Working Group (UWG) Joint Assembly 2007 Acapulco, Mexico –Chairs Jorge Vazquez, Craig Donlon, Ken Casey, Zdenka Willis –Specifically targeting using GHRSST and other Remotely Sensed Climate Data Records (CDR).

NASA’s Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences 2007:Appendix A6 Physical Oceanography Call ROSES 2007 Headquarters Program Manager Eric Lindstrom. Emphasis placed on SST and salinity. Gary Lagerloef and Jorge Vazquez mentioned as points of contact for salinity and SST respectively. –“NASA is playing a central role in providing the next generation of data products for sea surface temperature through the Global Ocean Data Assimilation Experiment (GODAE) High-Resolution Sea Surface Temperature (GHRSST) pilot project ( Products”. –Expected to lead to a large increase in users

ROSES 2007: continued “Proposals are sought which characterize and/or reduce uncertainties in these data products, utilize prototype products to constrain ocean general- circulation models or interact directly with the GHRSST project to prepare for exploitation of data.”

SSES Working Group Data Policy document-more discussion on this later. Formation of Single Sensor Error Characteristics (SSES) Working Group (led by Pierre LeBorgne, Group includes; –Robert Evans –Gary Cortlett –Gary Wick –Peter Minnett –Bryan Franz –Doug May –Chelle Gentermann –John Stark –Jorge Vazquez

Single Sensor Error Characteristics Working Group Formed: Issues Discussion chaired by Pierre LeBorgne Initial questions proposed for discussion -Are SSES exclusively defined against buoys measurements -if so how to make a partition of the MDB? -Any alternative to use the confidence levels to partition the MDB? -How to define the confidence levels? -Can we agree on a range of errors per confidence level?

NASA’s MEaSURE Proposal Call Making Earth System Data Records for Use in Research Environments (MEaSURE) Focus on product development –Several proposals submitted in support of GHRSST activities. Decisions should be known by the Fall of this year. Several of these proposals will have an impact on possible future GHRSST products –

Data Policy Document The PO.DAAC has implemented new Data Acceptance Procedures which should be compatible with GHRSST data policy. Draft GHRSST data policy document has been written in collaboration with DM-TAG members and led by Ken Casey.

Data Policy Document: Continued Issues for discussion –For GDAC purposes GHRSST is treated as a mission. This means final authority for data acceptance rests with the GHRSST Science Team. –What are the requirements for GHRSST acceptance. Starting reference point should be the draft Data Policy document. The following 8 points have been identified by the GHRSST Team and are open for discussion

Data Policy: Continued 1.Agree to provide all data and metadata in a free and open manner to the GDAC, without usage restrictions. 2.Agree to allow all data and metadata to be provided by the LTSRF in a free and open manner in perpetuity, without usage restrictions. 3.Routinely review and report to the chair of the DM-TAG on data and metadata compliance to the current version of the GHRSST Data Specification (GDS) using the GHRSST Data Compliance Checker and GHRSST Metadata Compliance Checker [these would need to be written and maintained]..

Data Policy: continue 4.Annually review and report to the chairs of DM-TAG and RAN-TAG with anticipated data streams and data volume rates for the coming year. 5.DM-TAG and RAN-TAG will provide the results of the above review and report to the GDAC(s) for their planning and support preparation. 6. Bring all existing product streams into compliance within 6 months of issuance of new versions of the GDS. 7. Routinely monitor product quality and completeness and report any anomalies to the GDAC, LTRSF, and GHRSST Project Office. 8. Agree to bring two bottles of nice wine from their local region to each Science Team meeting: one as a gift for the local host, and one for sharing at the Meeting Dinner. In addition, send additional bottles of wine, and at least ¼ Kilo of top quality chocolate to the GDAC(s).

Issue for discussion Based on Action Item 28 from GHRSST 7 meeting in Boulder. –"Establish how GHRSST-PP data sets can be made visible to the THREDDS community in a coordinated manner by linking to the GHRSST-PP MMR system." THREDDS catalogs are XML descriptions of data. Format issues for GDS_v2.0,beta netcdf4, HDF5, bzip2

Conclusions There is no expectation that all of these issues will be resolved at this meeting. Hopefully discussions will provide the basis for a decision making process that can be achieved via or teleconferencing. Soon to be published BAMS article will lead to a marked increase in the number of users. We need to provide a period of stability within the context of GDS v2.0 of data products and be prepared to listen to our users.