Insert excerpt

Excerpt

This page captures discussion of the European Service Registry and the registry concept.

Info
Note: the decision making body is the Registry CCB.

Table of Contents

Current Service Registry

Info
From Common Project 1: the registry, which must be used for publishing information about services, including service definitions that describe those aspects of a service that should be common among all implementations, such as standardised service specifications and implementation descriptions for providers

Discussion

There is a large degree of freedom when describing services. Harmonisation of entries through codelists may be good.
- See New: Best practices to harmonise content of service description fields for work on this area.
Compare further service descriptions from the MET community, identify similar services (HTTP, AMPQ) and evaluate commonalities/differences

need some vision paper in the area dealing with e.g.
- federated and interconnected registries should be put in place - registry hierarchy
- runtime v design time registry
criteria to determine if a service is to be published in a European, national or local registry
service discovery should be a feature, but it is really unclear to have concrete use cases in our operational ATM / AIM / ATFCM where we can demonstrate the need for service discovery

Note

The following terms are used here but have not been clarified:

The responsiveness of the Registry can be improved. Sometime there is a delay when you click the ‘edit’ button.There is a large degree of freedom when describing services. Harmonisation of entries through codelists may be good.

What will be the technology to enable such a vision? Probably not all registry products are interoperable.
Interaction with OGC's service discovery service (https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=94391).

Compare further service descriptions from the MET community, identify similar services (HTTP, AMPQ) and evaluate commonalities/differences