Updates moon dec and january

---

date: '2022-12-08'

title: '2023-01-12 Working Meeting'

---

{{<  meeting-notes >}}

[Teams Link](https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjM0MzI5NGUtZDI1ZS00YWVjLWI1MTctYjUzZTU4OTVlNWIz%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%220693b5ba-4b18-4d7b-9341-f32f400a5494%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%22c27c6e98-e45a-45ff-aea5-7f10d6fe67c1%22%7d)

No dial in number yet, sorry!

## Attendees

- 

## Agenda

- Governance document review

- Comments on standards

- Next meeting agenda

- 

## Notes

- 

- Open floor

## Action Items

- 

 No newline at end of file

---

date: '2022-12-08'

title: '2022-12-08 Working Meeting'

---

{{<  meeting-notes >}}

[Teams Link](https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjM0MzI5NGUtZDI1ZS00YWVjLWI1MTctYjUzZTU4OTVlNWIz%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%220693b5ba-4b18-4d7b-9341-f32f400a5494%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%22c27c6e98-e45a-45ff-aea5-7f10d6fe67c1%22%7d)

No dial in number yet, sorry!

## Attendees

- Jay Laura

- 

## Agenda

- LPSC Abstract

- LEAG Meeting (Executive Group)

- Lunar SDI Standards:

  - Data interoperability and (???) should make heavy use of hyperlinks.

  - Data interoperability: Longitude domain. GISystems want -180 to 180. Compelling reasons to force 0-360?

  - Data interoperability -> Map Projections: 'centered on an image' - what does that mean? Poor language.

  - Cartographic Standards - Styled Layer Descriptor for vector symbols in GeoPackage format

  - 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.?

- Open floor

## Notes

- 

## 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!

 No newline at end of file

---

date: '2022-12-08'

title: '2022-12-08 Working Meeting'

---

{{<  meeting-notes >}}

[Teams Link](https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjM0MzI5NGUtZDI1ZS00YWVjLWI1MTctYjUzZTU4OTVlNWIz%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%220693b5ba-4b18-4d7b-9341-f32f400a5494%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%22c27c6e98-e45a-45ff-aea5-7f10d6fe67c1%22%7d)

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](https://www.lpi.usra.edu/leag/reports/LEAG2022AnnualMeetingFindings_FINAL.pdf), 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!

 No newline at end of file