| At line 0 added 60 lines. |
| + !! Analysis and Modeling System |
| + |
| + !! Collaboration with GeoVista Studio and DiscoveryNet |
| + General agreement that collaboration would be productive on a number of issues. Some potential areas for collaboration: |
| + * Develop common grid services architecture for describing components and workflows |
| + * Execution models |
| + ** Cycles |
| + ** temporal domains for execution (Director in Ptolemy) |
| + * Can SEEK adopt a GUI for workflow composition? |
| + ** can we use componenets from multiple environments |
| + ** can the GUI realistically be deployed to our target science community? |
| + *** IP issues |
| + *** financial issues |
| + * computational steering for distributing and controlling execution |
| + * How can KR and semantics be used in an open system for driving the analysis process? |
| + ** using semantic mediation in various system components (data integration, workflow composition) |
| + |
| + !! Workflow languages |
| + Some choices: XPDL, DPML, MoML, (Monarch), PMML, VDL/Chimera |
| + * need to ask Victor and Liying about benefits and problems with particular languages from a verificatin/validation/static analysis perspective |
| + |
| + !! Tasks |
| + # Task assignments |
| + # Workflow languages |
| + ** Review and summarize features of relevant workflow languages (Bertram) |
| + ** determine if DiscoveryNet and GV Studio have explicit execution models, and if they are exposed through their respective workflow languages (e.g., DPML) |
| + ** create static representation of steps that can be bound at runtime to implementation classes, and that can be created by the scientist before an implementation has been wrapped or discovered |
| + ** adapt Ptolemy for use by BEAM to more rapidly create some more workflows for real analysis scenarios that we can analyze for patterns |
| + ** how can we add more informationon to the link to facilitate tranformation |
| + # Explore GeoVista Studio |
| + ** use it to create an interesting visualization for the GARP pipeline (ask for assistance if needed) |
| + ** figure out execution model |
| + ** determine if an executing Ptolemy workflow can output to GV Studio for visualization |
| + *** implement it |
| + ** follow up on extraction of ontologies from scientists and where GVStudio is at on linking concepts to data |
| + # Explore data typing |
| + ** how can we make this WSDL compatible, and specifically xsd data types? |
| + ** determine how do we link semantic types in MOML and other languages? probably a new property |
| + # Follow up with DiscoveryNet |
| + ** what are our requirements for collaboration? is source code required? is open source required? |
| + ** establish conf call with Yike Guo when we have our plans worked out |
| + # Explore flexible generation of transformation steps |
| + ** Examine Blue Titan approach to transforming WSDL steps |
| + ** Figure out how SMS/AMS can help discover steps that fill a particular transformation role |
| + ** Figure out how to generate GUI for creating first-class transform steps for particular mapping purposes |
| + *** includes schema tranformations |
| + *** this can use the target semantic type as the target view for transformation |
| + ** determine pros/cons of having transformations directly associated with links versus being implemented as a step unto themselves |
| + # Contact Ptolemy people |
| + # Analyze case studies for patterns and "correctness" |
| + |
| + !! Priorities |
| + |
| + !! Short-term |
| + # Quick and dirty pipeline editor that allows construction of test cases even if not executable (modified Ptolemy) |
| + # Analyze case studies for patterns and "correctness" |
| + # Identify key collaborators and bring them to All-hands meeting |
| + |
| + !! Long-term |
| + # Figure out long-term conceptual approach to data integration (e.g., as described by Villa) |
