Metadata Federation of PICES Member Countries

(Document pdf contains 193 pages) Executive Summary (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 1. Introduction (pdf, 0.2 Mb) 1.1 Data sharing, international boundaries and large marine ecosystems 2. Objectives (pdf, 0.3 Mb) 3. Background (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 3.1 North Pacific Ecosystem Metadatabase 3.2 First federation effort: NPEM and the Korea Oceanographic Data Center 3.2 Continuing effort: Adding Japan’s Marine Information Research Center 4. Metadata Standards (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 4.1 Directory Interchange Format 4.2 Ecological Metadata Language 4.3 Dublin Core 4.3.1. Elements of DC 4.4 Federal Geographic Data Committee 4.5 The ISO 19115 Metadata Standard 4.6 Metadata stylesheets 4.7 Crosswalks 4.8 Tools for creating metadata 5. Communication Protocols (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 5.1 Z39.50 5.1.1. What does Z39.50 do? 5.1.2. Isite 6. Clearinghouses (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 7. Methodology (pdf, 0.2 Mb) 7.1 FGDC metadata 7.1.1. Main sections 7.1.2. Supporting sections 7.1.3. Metadata validation 7.2 Getting a copy of Isite 7.3 NSDI Clearinghouse 8. Server Configuration and Technical Issues (pdf, 0.4 Mb) 8.1 Hardware recommendations 8.2 Operating system – Red Hat Linux Fedora 8.3 Web services – Apache HTTP Server version 2.2.3 8.4 Create and validate FGDC-compliant Metadata in XML format 8.5 Obtaining, installing and configuring Isite for UNIX/Linux 8.5.1. Download the appropriate Isite software 8.5.2. Untar the file 8.5.3. Name your database 8.5.4. The zserver.ini file 8.5.5. The sapi.ini file 8.5.6. Indexing metadata 8.5.7. Start the Clearinghouse Server process 8.5.8. Testing the zserver installation 8.6 Registering with NSDI Clearinghouse 8.7 Security issues 9. Search Tutorial and Examples (pdf, 1 Mb) 9.1 Legacy NSDI Clearinghouse search interface 9.2 New GeoNetwork search interface 10. Challenges (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 11. Emerging Standards (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 12. Future Activity (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 13. Acknowledgments (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 14. References (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 15. Acronyms (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16. Appendices 16.1. KODC-NPEM meeting agendas and minutes (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.1.1. Seattle meeting agenda, August 22–23, 2005 16.1.2. Seattle meeting minutes, August 22–23, 2005 16.1.3. Busan meeting agenda, October 10–11, 2005 16.1.4. Busan meeting minutes, October 10–11, 2005 16.2. MIRC-NPEM meeting agendas and minutes (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.2.1. Seattle Meeting agenda, August 14-15, 2006 16.2.2. Seattle meeting minutes, August 14–15, 2006 16.2.3. Tokyo meeting agenda, October 19–20, 2006 16.2.4. Tokyo, meeting minutes, October 19–20, 2006 16.3. XML stylesheet conversion crosswalks (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.3.1. FGDCI to DIF stylesheet converter 16.3.2. DIF to FGDCI stylesheet converter 16.3.3. String-modified stylesheet 16.4. FGDC Metadata Standard (pdf, 0.1 Mb) 16.4.1. Overall structure 16.4.2. Section 1: Identification information 16.4.3. Section 2: Data quality information 16.4.4. Section 3: Spatial data organization information 16.4.5. Section 4: Spatial reference information 16.4.6. Section 5: Entity and attribute information 16.4.7. Section 6: Distribution information 16.4.8. Section 7: Metadata reference information 16.4.9. Sections 8, 9 and 10: Citation information, time period information, and contact information 16.5. Images of the Isite server directory structure and the files contained in each subdirectory after Isite installation (pdf, 0.2 Mb) 16.6 Listing of NPEM’s Isite configuration files (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.6.1. zserver.ini 16.6.2. sapi.ini 16.7 Java program to extract records from the NPEM metadatabase and write one XML file for each record (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.8 Java program to execute the metadata extraction program (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) A1 Addendum 1: Instructions for Isite for Windows (pdf, 0.6 Mb) A2 Addendum 2: Instructions for Isite for Windows ADHOST (pdf, 0.3 Mb)

Enabling Sensor* Interoperability, Portland, Maine, October 16-18 2006: workshop proceedings

The ACT workshop "Enabling Sensor Interoperability" addressed the need for protocols at the hardware, firmware, and higher levels in order to attain instrument interoperability within and between ocean observing systems. For the purpose of the workshop, participants spoke in tern of "instruments" rather than "sensors," defining an instrument as a device that contains one or more sensors or actuators and can convert signals from analog to digital. An increase in the abundance, variety, and complexity of instruments and observing systems suggests that effective standards would greatly improve "plug-and-work" capabilities. However, there are few standards or standards bodies that currently address instrument interoperability and configuration. Instrument interoperability issues span the length and breadth of these systems, from the measurement to the end user, including middleware services. There are three major components of instrument interoperability including physical, communication, and application/control layers. Participants identified the essential issues, current obstacles, and enabling technologies and standards, then came up with a series of short and long term solutions. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within 6 months of the release of this report are: A list of recommendations for enabling instrument interoperability should be put together and distributed to instrument developers. A recommendation for funding sources to achieve instrument interoperability should be drafted. Funding should be provided (for example through NOPP or an IOOS request for proposals) to develop and demonstrate instrument interoperability technologies involving instrument manufacturers, observing system operators, and cyberinfrastructure groups. Program managers should be identified and made to understand that milestones for achieving instrument interoperability include a) selection of a methodology for uniquely identifying an instrument, b) development of a common protocol for automatic instrument discovery, c) agreement on uniform methods for measurements, d) enablement of end user controlled power cycling, and e) implementation of a registry component for IDS and attributes. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within S years of the release of this report are: An ocean observing interoperability standards body should be established that addresses standards for a) metadata, b) commands, c) protocols, d) processes, e) exclusivity, and f) naming authorities.[PDF contains 48 pages]

Management and Promotion of Digitization Projects: Geologic Atlas of the US

The Geologic Atlas of the United States was digitized and stored in the Texas A&M University institutional repository. Extensive metadata was created which emphasized the geographic and geologic aspects of the material. The map sheets were also convered into kml files for Google Earth and ESRI shape files for use in GIS. A Yahoo!Map interface allows for visualization of the locations of each folio and user friendly browsing across the collection. Details of the project will be discussed, including the selection, digitization methods and standards, preservation, metadata, web presence and staffing. Its storage in DSpace, assortment of publicity outlets, and its inclusion in targeted clearinghouses expand its potential use to national and international audiences.

Environmental quality standards to protect identified uses of controlled waters: salmonid fisheries, cyprinid fisheries, migratory fisheries, commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption, commercial harvesting of shellfish for for public consumption

This report considers the development of environmental quality standards (EQSs) for the salmonid fishery, cyprinid fishery, migratory fishery, commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption and commercial harvesting of shellfish for public consumption uses of controlled surface waters. Previous reports have been used to identify those parameters necessary for the maintenance of these five uses. Each water use is considered in a separate section within which identified parameters are discussed and standards proposed, a summary of the proposed standards is presented at the beginning of the relevant section. For salmonid, cyprinid and migratory fisheries, EQSs for substances in water have been proposed for the protection of these fisheries. For the commercial harvesting of marine fish and shellfish for public consumption uses 'Warning Levels' of substances in waters have been proposed. These 'Warning Levels' have been proposed by considering data on bioaccumulation and food standards and aim to prevent acceptable intake values and concentrations in fish/shellfish flesh exceeding statutory or recommended levels. For the commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption it has been concluded that the current EQSs for most List II substances for the protection of salt water life should be adequately stringent to protect this use, however for the commercial harvesting of shellfish for public consumption, these List II EQSs do not appear adequate to protect this use and more stringent 'Warning Levels' have been proposed. For all five uses considered in this report there has been found to be limited information on a number of the parameters considered and in general for indigenous species, this has been found to be especially so when considering migratory fisheries and the commercial harvesting of marine fish and shellfish.

Proposed Environmental Quality Standards for Phenol in Water

This is the Proposed Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for Phenol in Water prepared for the National Rivers Authority, and published by the Environment Agency in 1995. The report reviews the properties and uses of phenol, its fate, behaviour and reported concentrations in the environment and critically assesses the available data on its toxicity and bioaccumulation. The information is used to derive EQSs for the protection of fresh and saltwater life and for the abstraction of water to potable supply. Phenol is widely used as a chemical intermediate and the main sources for phenol in the environment are of anthropogenic origin. Phenol may also be formed during natural decomposition of organic material. The persistence of phenol in the aquatic environment is low with biodegradation being the main degradation process (half-lives of hours to days). Phenol is moderately toxic to aquatic organisms and its potential to bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms is low.

Proposed Environmental Quality Standards for Nonylphenol in Water

This is the Proposed Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for Nonylphenol in Water produced by the Environment Agency in 1997. The report reviews the properties and uses of Nonylphenol, its fate, behaviour and reported concentrations in the environment, and critically assesses available data on its toxicity and bioaccumulation. The information is used to derive EQSs for the protection of fresh and saltwater life as well as for water abstracted to potable supply.Nonylphenol (NP) is used extensively in the production of other substances such as non-ionic ethoxylate surfactants. It is through the incomplete anaerobic biodegradation of these surfactants that most nonylphenol reaches the aquatic environment in effluents, e.g. from sewage treatment works and certain manufacturing operations. It was explicitly stated by the Environment Agency that the EQS was to be derived for NP and not Nonylphenol ethoxylates. However, since NP is unlikely to be present in the aquatic environment in the absence of other nonylphenol ethoxylate (NPE) degradation by-products, the toxicity, fate and behaviour of some of these (i.e. nonylphenol mono- and diethoxylates (NP1EO and NP2EO), mono- and di-nonylphenoxy carboxylic acids (NP1EC and NP2EC) have also been considered in this report. In the aquatic environment and during sewage treatment, NPEs are rapidly degraded to NP under aerobic conditions. NP may then be either fully mineralised or may be adsorbed to sediments. Since NP cannot be biodegraded under anaerobic conditions it can accumulate in sediments to high concentrations.