scrollbar}

See also: OATC Wiki Home

Date: June 8 - 9, 20010
Venue: Unesco-IHE, The Netherlands

Participants:

Rob Knapen, Alterra, Wageningen UR (Rob.Knapen@wur.nl)
Standa Vanecek, DHI (s.vanecek@dhi.cz)
Stef Hummel, Deltares (stef.hummel@deltares.nl)
Jesper Grooss, DHI (jgr@dhigroup.com)

Apologies:
~jnh@dhigroup.com, DHI (jnh@dhigroup.com)
Peter Schade, Bundesanstalt fuer Wasserbau (peter.schade@baw.de)
Daniele Andreis,Universita` di Trento,(daniele.andreis@gmail.com)
Jan Gregersen, LicTek

Documents:

Table of contents

1. Comments from review

Make clear how use IElementSet to work with OGC formats

Two alternatives were discussed:

• Document how each OGC feature is to be used by the current elementset.
• Make a more general element set, and let the current element set extent from the general one. And open for the possibility for other extensions of the general one, being e.g. the different OGC feature classes.

The discussion turned into which strategy was the best for OpenMI: To document specialized interfaces, or to have general ones and allow them to be extended over time.

How to make the standard extendable

Meating with EPA on how to make OpenMI and FRAMES work together, and also several reviewers, have

Strategy for releasing 2.0

Releasing standard and then extensions.

Possible candidates for extensions.

• Advanced spatial/GIS functionality/element sets.
• Ontologies
• Parallel computations

Releasing full standard, reflecting all suggested requests, including SDK and GUI.

Existing problems: No model, neither test models nor real world model has really been used and tested using the 2.0 standard.

Limited resources within OATC for testing and development, in order to get as well the standard as the SDK "correct".

Limited resources for GUI development and support.