1. The IUGS/CGI Data Model and Interchange Collaboration John Laxton BGS

2. The Problem An increasing requirement to be able to provide and exchange data in electronic format: –For government / regulatory organisations eg EEA –For our user / customer community –Between state /federal geological surveys Every organisation provided data in a different format so difficult to integrate

3. History BGS and GSC convened an informal meeting in Edinburgh in November 2003 to discuss problem Attended by representatives of geological surveys from: UK, Canada, US, France, Germany, Netherlands, Australia (CSIRO), Sweden, Japan, Czech Republic, Poland, Ireland, Finland….. General agreement on need to address problem

4. Meeting agreed to set up task groups to: Develop a conceptual geoscience data model Map this to an interchange format Develop a testbed to prove / demonstrate use of the interchange format Assess vocabulary requirements Objectives

5. Initial scope agreed to be: Information shown on geological maps Boreholes Scope

6. Organisation IUGS-CGI had been recently set up and it was agreed the initiative would be a working group under the CGI Participants drawn from organisations willing to participate as no funding!!

7. Current active participants

8. Approach Develop a conceptual data model and from this derive logical data model in UML Map this to XML for interchange using OGC GML standard – a geoscience exchange language GeoSciML Draw on previous work –Existing geoscience data models in particular NADM –XMML Use OGC WMS/WFS for delivery

9. First steps Meeting convened in Perth in December 2004 to assess existing data models and begin development of logical data model In parallel Testbed 1 developed by BGS & BRGM for demonstration at IGC Florence in 2004 using boreholes in Channel Tunnel area CSIRO Twiki used for online collaboration

10. Next steps Presentations on progress & objectives made at IAMG Toronto in August 2005 Further meeting convened in Ottawa after this to progress model Agreed to develop a Testbed 2 for demonstration at IAMG Liege in September 2006 Agreed use cases for testbed Data model consolidated and emphasis on delivery

11. Where we are now Successful development of Testbed 2 – although clear pushing current technology to limit Demonstration at IAMG 06 created wider interest in participation (in use rather than development) GeoSciML still very much in development

12. What needs to be done (1) Organised more formally to allow more organisations to participate and move to production system

13. Interest Community (IC) Interoperability Working Group 1. Request Feature 3. Review comment 4. Change Request 2. Deliver Specification GeoSciML 2.0 Design Task Group GeoSciML Service Deployment Group GeoSciML Test Bed Task Group GeoSciML Service Architecture Task Group

14. What needs to be done (2) Produce documentation –Formal documentation of GeoSciML as ‘Standard’ –Cookbooks –Management overview Data model needs to be extended, in particular to include observation data in order to exchange a useful amount of information

15. What needs to be done (3) Develop vocabularies - at present structure standard but not content –Geoscience ontologies Functionality of WMS/WFS implementation needs to be enhanced –OGC standards ahead of implementation technology –Working with a range of implementation options Lack of funding an increasing problem