U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Untitled Document
Planetary SDI
Toggle Dark/Light/Auto mode Toggle Dark/Light/Auto mode Toggle Dark/Light/Auto mode Back to homepage
Edit page

2022-12-08 Working Meeting

Meeting Notes from: December 8, 2022

Teams Link No dial in number yet, sorry!

Attendees

  • Jay Laura
  • Brent Archinal
  • Laz Kestay
  • Marc Hunter
  • Julie Stopar
  • Ross Beyer
  • Noah Petro

Agenda

  • LPSD Abstract
  • LEAG Meeting (Executive Group)
  • Lunar SDI Standards

Notes

  • LPSC Abstract
    • Jay working on it. Will be Europa / Lunar.
  • LEAG Meeting (Executive Group)
    • Other folks that want to dial in. It’s 2PM on the 12th.
    • I’ll ask again about you all dialing in.
    • Take a look at the findings that they issues a few days ago. Specifically, special action team, something between MAPSIT and LEAG.
      • See the LEAG findings here, particularly finding 6.
  • Lunar SDI Standards:
    • Data interoperability and (???) should make heavy use of hyperlinks.
      • Will add references.
      • Brent will get some additional links / references as well.
    • Data interoperability: Longitude domain. GISystems want -180 to 180. Compelling reasons to force 0-360?
      • Another GISer applauded. This avoid problems. What are the reasons not to do this?
      • Ross: It is hard to get away from being bi-lingual.
      • Historically, this has been 0-360. Brent, doesn’t see these going away. If we want to recommend that one that is absolutely fine. Why doesn’t the software accomodate 0-360?
      • Where are the data creators working?
        • Ross: Working in 0-360
        • Large Mare work: 0-360 is a pain
          • Why? It’s hard to make a large mare mosaic when 330 - 90. Data also splits.
          • Raster is easier / vector is worse.
        • Recent versions of desktop GISs are not an issue.
      • LRO standard is 0-360.
        • Difference between storage standard and display standard.
        • Propagate the standard.
        • It is easy to omit the negative.
        • Fear of mistakes is not a great rationale - but it is definitely a data point.
      • Motion: Adopt 0 to 360 for data storage. Laz seconded.
        • Julie, no perfect solution.
    • Data interoperability -> Map Projections: ‘centered on an image’ - what does that mean? Poor language.
      • Julie - will feel foreign to have data in non-equirectangular or orthographic projections.
      • Brent - storage vs. display. Lunar Geodesy Cartography working group. Use Equirectangular, except where you use polar stereographic. For display, you need to do your thing.
      • Julie: What is the goal for data interoperability -
        • User: Just visualize, ad discovery, and interoperability with well calibrated (photometric, radiometric, geometric)
        • Producer: Make data.
      • That rationale is not clear for the map projections. When we get to the local stuff, the perspective is going to be different than at smaller scales.
      • What context can be added to the standards to provide a framework for making these decisions?
      • Separate discussion for what projections for what processes / analyses?
        • Can make general recommendations, but local stuff is wide open.
    • Has Artemis discussed? Engineers want a local system?
    • Remove the bullets about specific projections. Everything goverened inside the Lunar SDI will be equirectangular. Caveats are confusing.
    • In another section, we can provide local scale ideas and support.
    • Cartographic Standards - Styled Layer Descriptor for vector symbols in GeoPackage format
      • These are really hard, especially when beyond a color / line style. SLD is an OGC standard for cartographic representations. Works great with GIS data in a GeoPackage. This is not tied to an ArcGIS project. This decouples application specific data without losing the value of the symbology. This highlights a gap where there is not great support for translation of SLDs.
    • Metadata Standards: metadata standards - support of FGDC or ISO, recommending the transition to ISO (reduces friction with accuracy descriptions). Also, should we address unique resource identifiers for data, people, organizations, controlled vocabularies, etc.?
      • Use a standard. Gov is moving towards ISO. (SPD-41a talks about the need to index metadata.)
      • Stuff is available in Dublin Core, etc.
      • Suggest that folks conform to ISO, be happy with others.
    • Future discussion:
      • Recommendations on unique identifiers. How are they used, where will they be used, etc?
    • Brent: Generic improvements. (Jay will integrate.)
      • Not sure that the headings make sense. Some things seem like cartographic standards. How are the headings organized? Should these change? What is missing?
        • Headings are not absolute. Re-organization is great.
        • There should be a section that disucsses reference frames separate from the
        • Cartographic standards should have map projection information, scale, etc.
      • Data format standards:
        • Separate thing. How do you store data? Does this need additional information?
      • Lunar Geodesy Cartography Working Group (Cartographic or data format section)
        • Thought about tiling. How do you separate the data? Do we have / endorse a quad system?
        • Tiling?
        • When tiling schemes are in conflict that causes interoperability issues.
      • Need to continue having lunar quads?
        • Do we need to explain them or recommend their use?
  • Motion:
    • Clean, add context, reorganize, executive summary, and solicit for feedback.
  • Open floor

Action Items

  • From last meeting:
    • All: Review governance documents. Async discussion as appropriate. Goal is to be able to discuss in person anything where consensus is hard to find in January.
    • All: Think about an LPSC abstract (due 2 days before our January meeting). Likely a great opportunity to publicize our work. Discuss async if possible to keep space for standards discussion. I (Jay) can write a lunar/europa SDI one or a separate lunar and Europa one. Anyone on here can first author this too!
    • Jay: Clean, add context, reorganize, executive summary, and solicit for feedback.