airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (398J)" <>
Subject Re: Research project on integrating geoservices with Apache Airavata
Date Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:05:00 GMT
Hi Suresh,

Just to add to the below. I *do* see Apache SIS as a reference
implementation of OGC standards that Martin and others are working
on. I'm also a GeoAPI WG member at OGC mainly through Martin's
and my own desire to get better at geospatial software.

We're starting small at the library level, with plans to grow big
and support all the way up the stack. There are a ton of interested
geo people here on the list, but Martin is doing the bulk of the
work on the code base at the moment, so we're trying to keep up
and follow his lead.

We welcome any contribution you guys have and connections to Airavata
and to OODT.


Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Suresh Marru <>
Reply-To: "" <>
Date: Wednesday, April 3, 2013 8:01 PM
To: "" <>
Cc: "" <>, Harsha Kumara
<>, Shahani Markus Weerawarana <>,
Nipuni Perera <>, ""
Subject: Re: Research project on integrating geoservices with Apache

>Hi Martin,
>Thank you for taking time to respond in detail. Please see comments
>On Apr 3, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Martin Desruisseaux
><> wrote:
>> Le 03/04/13 23:30, Suresh Marru a écrit :
>>> Hello Martin, It is really pleasing to hear such a commitment from
>>>some one deeply engaged in OGC. While I agree with you on the influence
>>>on a younger project and also the impact an open community process like
>>>Apache can have. I personally respect OGC as a governing organization
>>>and as a standards defining body. But we all could not deny the fact
>>>that community rallied behind OGC and produced some good software. I am
>>>curious to learn how will community respond to Apache SIS vs any
>>>software endorsed by OGC? Do you see SIS positioning itself as a
>>>reference implementation for the OGC standard?
>> I think that SIS will probably be a reference implementation of GeoAPI
>>[1]. But I think that being a reference implementation of other
>>standards implies a strong participation in the standard working group,
>>which may be done on a case-by-case basis depending on volunteer energy.
>That makes sense. 
>> However maybe your question was rather if SIS would be officially OGC
>>compliant? This is a different question. Being OGC compliant means
>>passing the CITE tests [2]. Actually, executing the CITE tests will be
>>part of SIS Maven build after we ported the relevant part (I mean, CITE
>>tests can be executed every time the project is built).
>I am more wondering on the OGC Compliance from an interoperability stand
>point and not so much on official stamp. CITE tests as part of maven
>builds sounds very interesting.
>> Companies can also paid OGC for testing their software and get the
>>official "OGC compliant" logo. This is something that Geomatys plans to
>>do, but it would be on top of SIS rather than directly in the SIS
>>project. With the above-mentioned CITE tests executed at build time, I
>>think that anyone would be able to do that on their side.
>> Note that CITE tests are essentially about Web Services. An other
>>significant source of tests is GIGS [3]. Those tests are being
>>implemented in GeoAPI, and SIS will also execute them.
>> On the question about how community will respond to Apache SIS, I think
>>that OGC standards are so large that no single software in the world
>>implement all of them. Different softwares may focus on different needs.
>>We can probably not please to every communities. My hope is rather to
>>have SIS well-suited to some communities (scientists, but also
>>non-scientists wanting to explore data in more dimensions than the usual
>I agree with this. Looking forward to see SIS gets widely adopted.
>Thanks again for taking time to elaborate in detail, I kind of got of a
>feel for it. 
>>    Martin
>> [1]
>> [2]
>> [3]

View raw message