Open amilan17 opened 1 year ago
I am not sure we ought to change anything here. The fact that CIMO does no longer exist doesn't change the fact that it was CIMO who generated these elements. After all, we also reference Newton in our unit table ...
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2023.04.21-TT-WIGOSMD notes: If the GIMO Guide has the definitions, then we could update these with proper references. Gao noted that there are other NASA definitions at https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/engage/open-data-services-and-software/data-information-policy/data-levels and Anna noted that NOAA has different/similar definitions.
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2023.05.04-TT-WIGOSMD notes: @meulenvd is still checking the definitions in the regulatory material of WMO.
@joergklausen @meulenvd @gaochen-larc I support better defining the source of such definitions, for example WMO-No. 8 (Guide to instruments and methods of observation). Also, I feel like the above table includes both levels for in situ instruments (ground based) as well as for satellite data. These two use cases may have to be treated separately?
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2023.06.01-TT-WIGOSMD notes:
The real issue is that there are many sources. The reference to CEOS and CIMO is arbitrary, out-of-date or obsolete. Also the definitions are not valid anymore. A source, containing definitions with a mandatory status is the list of definitions in WMO-No. 49 (Technical Regulations), Vol. I (see below). Other sources within the WMO set of Manuals and Guides: WMO-No. 8 (GIMO), Vol. IV, par. 2.3.2.6 and Vol. V, par. 3.1.1, and also WMO-No. 488, Part IV, par. 4.3. (Note: also the old (2013) Man. on the GDPFS WMO-No. 485, Vol. I contains a set of definitions, but removed later on). Apart from there references, the WMO Space Programme (WSP) published definitions (comparable to GIMO, Vol. IV, par. 2.3.2.6) and the SPICE Programme* published a report (IOM 131, page 128), with definitions which can be considered as a future update for the definitions in GIMO Vol. V par. 3.1.1. These definitions don't differ very much from those expressed by the satellite community and I expect that further agreement to obtain one single set for both space as surface based observations within a short while. Also, the definitions in GIMO Vol. IV, par. 2.3.2.6 are very comparable to definitions expressed by WSP, NASA EOSDIS/Earthdata, This can be arranged within the INFCOM editing board working on updates of the GIMO.
The remaining issue is: do we like extensive definitions or short style, like in WMO-No. 47 or WSP? Both is possible and depends on what the users (readers) prefer.
Conclusion:
Reference, WMO-No. 8 (GIMO), Vol. IV and V:
Hyperlinks:
Extracts from WMO-No. 49 (Tech. Reg.):
DEFINITIONS
*) SPICE stands for WMO Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment (ask Rodica for more details on SPICE)
If there are no updates since last meeting, then I suggest moving this to FT2024-1.
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2023.06.30-TT-WIGOSMD notes:
@wmo-im/tt-wigosmd, @meulenvd - I updated the issue summary with the details of new definitions from the GIMO publications, but I cannot find a definition of raw. Text in bold indicates the same content in old and new definitions. I'd like to get your comments before I update the branch.
@wmo-im/tt-wigosmd, @meulenvd - I updated the issue summary with the details of new definitions from the GIMO publications, but I cannot find a definition of raw. Text in bold indicates the same content in old and new definitions. I'd like to get your comments before I update the branch.
Found a reference: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:19165:-2:ed-1:v1:en, 3.8 Product Level
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2024.01.18-TT-WIGOSMD notes: @meulenvd -- Do you have feedback on proposal as it stands today? (see issue summary at the top). If these changes are approved by you and the team within a week or two, we can include this proposal in FT2024-1.
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2024.01.18-TT-WIGOSMD notes: @meulenvd -- Do you have feedback on proposal as it stands today? (see issue summary at the top). If these changes are approved by you and the team within a week or two, we can include this proposal in FT2024-1.
After modification of the Technical Regulations (and the Annexes, like the Manual on the WIGOS and the Manual on the GDPFS), the definition of Level of Data in now in the GIMO (WMO-No. 8), Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observations. However two definitions are given, one in the Chapter on Satellite observations (Vol IV) and the other in Vol V (data reduction, but largely on Surface based observations). This discrepancy between both definitions will be solved. During the last SC-MINT Edititorial Board meeting (28 to 30 November 2023) is was decided to formulate a proposal to prepare a recommendation for the next INFCOM in order to get one uniform definition,
For the (short) time being we can accept the two definitions for Level of Data, One for surface based observations (ref. GIMO Vol. V), the other for Satellite based observations (ref. GIMO Vol IV), as stated on top under new description.
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2024.02.15-TT-WIGOSMD notes: (Jitze) current proposal will help with alignment with the WMO publications; @meulenvd update branch;
@meulenvd @joergklausen @amilan17 I've checked all this. The inputs originating from CEOS and from CIMO sometimes address different aspects of the data but, as far as I can see, they are not incompatible. I support Jitze's suggestion that we await the outcome of the SC-MINT initiative to formulate a unified definition (with the aim that it is acceptable to both space-based and surface-based observation communities, and to communities involved in the development/use of L3 and L4 products).
@joergklausen @amilan17 @JREyre The issue is that all references are out-of-date (and descriptions cannot be been found anymore), so the up-to-date references should be chosen as a first step. The follow up will be to present a proposal to SC-MINT with a uniform definition for both surface as space based observational data (to be published in WMO-No. 8). However, I we feel that the priority of this issue is really low, then we can wait of course until SC-MINT approved the proposal, but that may take longer than expected.
For this issue is see that for "raw", "unknown" and "inapplicable" there is no alternative which is trivial for "unknown" and "inapplicable", but there is some conflict with "raw" w/r "Level 0". For satellite based data "raw" is associated with the data packets or streams as received (complete or in fractions with erroneous data segments and unprocessed, just the pure data stream as recorded). For direct measurements, "raw" is associated with the analogue electric 'signals' (resistance, current, frequency) as the direct input to the measuring device, so not directly a data stream. As soon as it is digitized, but unprocessed and expressed in a unit it is qualified as "Level 0". Anyway, CEOS, NASA and WMO documents don't speak in terms of raw data, only in Level 0. Moreover I cannot imagine that "raw" data is disseminated as such, but only "Level 0". But if we want to keep "raw"in the table I propose to modify the definitions of both "Level 0" en "raw", to become:
Thank you for your input.
A comment from the side. When creating the ACTRIS vocabulary, we had a very similar discussion. We faced the situation that definitions of data levels vary from community to community, even among our own topic specific data centre units. This is caused by data treatment steps being distributed differently on the data levels in different communities. We decided not to use data levels at all towards the users (to avoid definition confusion), but to define vocabulary describing explicitly what type of treatment the data have received. Examples:
@markusfiebig @joergklausen @amilan17 @meulenvd Thanks, Marcus. My comment is not related to Level of Data, but I was interested and pleased to see that ACTRIS uses the term "timeliness" (rather than "latency"). For several years, I've been conducting a campaign to remove "latency" from WMO documents and replace it with "timeliness". Some progress, but I fear that it will be a lost battle in the end!
This issue is still under discussion.
@markusfiebig I commend ACTRIS and NILU for the vocabulary server, well made and something WMO should also look into. However, as TT-WIGOSMD we should still define the concept of Data Level and provide a few of the well accepted code lists. The concept exists, it obviously makes sense for some important communities if not for all of them. @meulenvd I recommend you conclude the work on this issue, so that we can draw a line at the next meeting, please.
@meulenvd Can you please prepare this for our next meeting? On the new Level 0 definition, I want to raise a concern, namely that it only addresses satellite data : "Instrument and auxiliary data reconstructed from satellite raw data after removing communications artefacts. [source: GIMO (WMO-No. 8), volume IV]" I hope this is not the final word ...
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2024.04.09%E2%80%90TT%E2%80%90WIGOSMD notes: @amilan17 sent an email to Isabelle and Ercan requesting of the status of the GIMO updates; Joerg would like this issue closed in FT2024-2;
Status update: A new proposal is drafted and submitted to the SC-MINT EdBd for follow up. I have chosen for a two step approach:
The proposal (new table see DataLevelsTable-Proposal.docx) is for step 1, where also definitions for surface based data are used from WMO IOM report 131 (Report of the WMO Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment, “SPICE”, 2012-2015), with definitions which are well documented and also based on Data Levels for satellite data but suitable for surface based data. The plan is now to consult Expert Teams (e.g. JET-OWR) which may have their own definitions for data levels.
@meulenvd latest proposal for level 0 Surface based data: The rawest and unprocessed output from an instrument or instrument transducer in native units (e.g. voltage) (sources WMO-No. 8, volume V & WMO IOM report 131, ‘SPICE’) Satellite based data: Instrument and auxiliary data reconstructed from satellite raw data after removing communications artefacts. [source: GIMO (WMO-No. 8), volume IV]
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2024.05.16%E2%80%90TT%E2%80%90WIGOSMD notes: The team looked at the proposed definitions in the attachment in Jitze's comment above. it was noted that surface based observations that entail a retrieval can have a level one or two.
TT-WIGOSMD noted that proposal by @meulenvd for the surface based observations is very much centered (and thus limited) to meteorological observation, while most of the descriptions would apply to other disciplines as well. It was also recognized that for most surface-based in-situ measurements, level1 is not relevant, with the exception of a few cases where a retrieval is involved.
https://github.com/wmo-im/tt-wigosmd/wiki/2024.06.20%E2%80%90TT%E2%80%90WIGOSMD notes: DECISION - remove from FT2024-2 milestone and wait for updates from the editorial boards or curators of the publications with these definitions;
Note, definitions are also included in the WMO-No. 49 (see https://library.wmo.int/idviewer/35722/16).
Initial request
During the FT2023-1 NFP review, we received feedback that "CIMO" is still referenced in the descriptions of codes in table 7-06 for Level of Data.
Amendment details
Comments
No response
Requestor(s)
James Lunny, NFP for Codes and Data Representation Matters Met Service, New Zealand
Stakeholder(s)
Enter list of stakeholder(s).
Publication(s)
Example: Manual on Codes (WMO-No. 306), Volume I.3, WMO Codes Registry, Code table 7-06, Level of Data,http://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/LevelOfData
Expected impact of change
LOW
Collaborators
No response
References
No response
Validation
No response