Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
group_modelling:st_data [2009/03/18 16:21] inpeifgi |
group_modelling:st_data [2009/03/19 11:18] (current) inpeifgi |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===== Spatio-Temporal Data Types, Operators and Tools ===== | ===== Spatio-Temporal Data Types, Operators and Tools ===== | ||
| - | |||
| Participants: Edzer, Jan, Lubia and Karine | Participants: Edzer, Jan, Lubia and Karine | ||
| Line 31: | Line 30: | ||
| - | === 2. One publication (extended abstract at Ilhabela) === | + | === 2. One Publication === |
| - | Publication 01) Survey of web services suitable for dealing with spatio-temporal data (access and processing) | + | //Title//: Survey of web service specifications for spatio-temporal data |
| - | What means spatial-temporal data? : kinds of dynamic phenomena, the data that arrives from them, they are distribuited in different data sources (describe different data sources), examples for phenomena (animal and iceberg tracking) and for data types (fields,objects) , what kind of operations we need to deal with the data (trajectories, intersection, distance between trajectories, overlay). | + | \\ |
| - | Search for existing ws specifications of different organizations such as OGC, ISO and others (?) that deal with this spatial-temporal data (SOS is for fixed sensors, WPS, WCS, OpenLS, Sensor Planning Service). | + | \\ |
| - | Evaluate the existing web services by considering: which spatial-temporal data each of them deal with, how usable they are, how compliant are existing implementations, can they used for mobile sensors, for what purpose they are (accessing, processing). | + | //Abstract//: Spatio-temporal data is used to represent dynamic spatial phenomena. |
| + | Some examples are physical processes like temperature and volcano eruption, moving objects | ||
| + | like animal tracking and iceberg movement as well as evolving objects like oil spill evolution | ||
| + | on the ocean. This spatio-temporal data is generated by different technologies, such as fixed | ||
| + | and mobile geosensors, GPS and Earth observation satellites or radio-frequency identification | ||
| + | (RFID) and can be distributed in different data sources. In order to analyse this kind of data | ||
| + | specific operations are necessary, for instance, extraction of trajectories, calculation of | ||
| + | the variation of distance between two moving objects over time and extraction of time series of | ||
| + | a specific location or area. | ||
| + | \\ | ||
| + | In this context, service oriented architecture is a good option to create interoperable | ||
| + | frameworks in order to handle distributed spatio-temporal data sources. Therefore, this work | ||
| + | aims to evaluate if and how existing web service specifications, such as Sensor Observation | ||
| + | Service (SOS), Web Feature Service (WFS), Web Coverage Service (WCS), Web Processing Service (WPS), | ||
| + | Open Location Service (OpenLS) and Sensor Planning Service (SPS), deal with spatio-temporal | ||
| + | information. The main goal is to assess them by considering the following aspects: | ||
| + | supported spatio-temporal data and operations, usability and compliance of existing | ||
| + | implementations. | ||
| - | !!!References!!! | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | Title: Survey of web services for spatio-temporal data | ||
| - | |||
| - | Abstract: | ||
| - | Nowadays, many web service specification for dealing with spatial data has been proposed, such as Sensor Observation Service(SOS) Web Feature Service (WFS), Web Cocerage Service (WCS), Web Processing Service (WPS), Open Location Service (OpenLS) and Sensor Planning Service (SPS). They can be used for accessing and processing data at a certain time snapshot, but the question is if they can used for spatial-temporal data in a sense of a process in time. This paper should give an overview over existing webservice specification and evaluate them under certain aspect. Therefore first the the | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| === 3. Identifying suitable tools for development and evaluation === | === 3. Identifying suitable tools for development and evaluation === | ||
| * TerraLib (database, elementary topological operations) | * TerraLib (database, elementary topological operations) | ||
| * TerraHS/Haskell (prototype implementation) | * TerraHS/Haskell (prototype implementation) | ||
| - | * PostGIS | ||
| * Secondo (database for moving objects), Aguila (visualisation) | * Secondo (database for moving objects), Aguila (visualisation) | ||
| * TerraME, PCRaster (environmental modelling) | * TerraME, PCRaster (environmental modelling) | ||
| Line 60: | Line 65: | ||
| * OGC web services -- 52N suite, ... | * OGC web services -- 52N suite, ... | ||
| - | === 4. topics for jointly supervised Masters- and PhD theses === | ||
| - | |||
| - | - web service (access and processing) specifications (Master thesis) | ||
| - | - usability of visualisation of spatio-temporal data (Q: bachelor or master?) | ||
| - | |||
| - | === 5. One mobility measure proposal === | ||
| - | | ||
| - | - Q:Is goodness of fit a possible mobility measure proposal? | ||
| - | |||
| - | === 6. Presentation of preliminary results (15+15 min. each) on Tue, Mar 17, 13.30-15.30 === | ||
| - | === 7. Presentation of final results (15+15 min. each) on Thu, Mar 19, 14.00-16.00 === | ||
