Canterbury Plugfest: Geospatial Interoperability Works!

276 views
213 views

Published on

Confronted with a major crisis in the form of the destructive Canterbury earthquakes of 2010/11, various information communities in Christchurch, New Zealand were suddenly compelled to re-engineer business-as-usual information sharing practices. The former ways of doing things would not scale to meet the new demands for timely and up-to-date information.
They addressed the challenge by adopting standards-based interoperable services to share geospatial information. These achieved efficiencies critical to the disaster response and are on-going for the recovery processes.
Sharing information is one step; Christchurch Earthquake recovery partners defined a further ambition to transact updates between one another, on their different platforms.
To accelerate cross-platform interoperability, the recovery partners, with support from LINZ, hosted a so-called ‘Plugfest’ in May 2012. Within three days a working solution between four vendor platforms was implemented and demonstrated, based on OGC compliant, transactional web-services.
This presentation outlines what was achieved and how. It also invites the audience to consider whether other communities could do likewise i.e. leverage similar benefits, without a catastrophe as catalyst? Establishing geospatial web services as the new ‘business as usual’.

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
276
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Canterbury Plugfest: Geospatial Interoperability Works!

  1. 1. CANTERBURY PLUGFEST: Geospatial Interoperability Works! Maurits van der Vlugt Mercury Project Solutions Richard Murcott | Geospatial Standards Leader New Zealand Geospatial Office
  2. 2. Overview Background Data Sharing Challenges Solution: a Plugfest! Should you consider hosting one yourself?
  3. 3. Kyle Dow, Senior Data Analyst, Corporate Data Team, CCC
  4. 4. 2010-11 Christchurch Earthquakes 4 Sept. 2010 7.1 magnitude 22 February 2011 6.3 magnitude - 185 dead - NZ‟s costliest disaster
  5. 5. Post Feb 2011 – Recovery Period Council Systems Intact! Data Sharing  Council  EM Agencies  Civil Defence  Utilities  Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry  Environment Canterbury (ECAN)  Etc… Initially: Sneakernet…
  6. 6. Photos: Kyle Dow, Senior Data Analyst, Corporate Data Team, CCC
  7. 7. Next step: Interoperable Supply Kyle Dow, Senior Data Analyst, Corporate Data Team, CCC
  8. 8. Wait: Death by Acronym!WFS:Web FeatureService
  9. 9. Next step: Interoperable Supply Kyle Dow, Senior Data Analyst, Corporate Data Team, CCC
  10. 10. WFS for Data Supply Works Kyle Dow, Senior Data Analyst, Corporate Data Team, CCC
  11. 11. Next step: Receiving Data? ? ? ? ? Kyle Dow, Senior Data Analyst, Corporate Data Team, CCC
  12. 12. Same Issues, but… Christchurch City holds Authoritative Data, e.g…  WasteWater  Building Status Construction partners manually submit data in variety of formats Time & Money wasted on data loading & management WFS has no capability to receive updates through interoperable web services
  13. 13. Transactional Web Service: WFS-T WFS: Geometry & Attributes - “Read Only” WFS-T: As WFS + “Create, Update, Delete” CCC + Partners struggled to successfully enable WFS-T  OGC compliance of their Software?  Schema harmonisation?  “Too hard” basket? Image: http://villagescribe.com.au
  14. 14. What they needed: Transactional Interoperability between recovery partners:  CERA, CCC, SCIRT  ESRI, Integraph  OGC Standards (NZGO SDI Cookbook) Practical, short-term solution (can‟t wait) Focus on issues with existing (OGC) standards interfaces, notably WFS-T Immediate results that will accelerate recovery & reconstruction efforts
  15. 15. Solution: WFS-T Plugfest Short Duration Collaborative Hands-on Independent Facilitation & WFS-T Architect “Just Make it Work” Image: http://www.ispcs.org
  16. 16.  Two Use-Case scenarios Set-up Data and Services Implement end-to- end Interoperability Photo: Maurits van der Vlugt Live Demo All in 3 days!
  17. 17. Technology Agnostic Organisation Technologies CCC Intergraph GeoMedia Pro Intergraph GeoMedia WebMap SCIRT ESRI ArcGIS Server ESRI ArcGIS Desktop Safe Software – FME WFS „Pump script‟ CERA Benoli Silverfish ESRI GeoDatabase WFS „Pump script‟ InsureCorp* Pitney Bowes Software MapInfo Professional* fictitious name to protect any commercial interests
  18. 18. Before and After
  19. 19. Lessons Learned Interoperability works!  WFS: Mature  COTS WFS-T Servers: Mature  COTS WFS-T Clients: Maturing WFS/WFS-T Schema Sensitive  Good Community Schema is important Submitting to WFS-T requires scripting or Client plug-ins
  20. 20. Conclusions Plugfest model is highly effective to achieve hands-on practical interoperability Demonstrated viable solution architecture with immediate business benefits Achieved in 3-day Plugfest, what would have taken weeks (effort) or months (elapsed) Photo: Andy Coote otherwise
  21. 21. THANK YOUMore Information:http://www.geospatial.govt.nz/christchurch-plugfest-2012-reportMaurits van der VlugtMaurits.vandervlugt@mercuryps.com.auTwitter: @mvandervlugtRichard Murcottrmurcott@linz.govt.nz

×