SWIM Communities of interest face-to-face meeting to be held back-to-back with the SWIM implementation workshop.

Meeting details

Venue

Date: 12 Dec 2019 0900-1600

Location: ECTL HQ Brussels (meeting room "General Aviation")

webex link: https://eurocontrol-conferences.webex.com/join/wvanhamm | 706 775 248

Objectives

The meeting aims to:

have end of year review
discuss some technical subjects
identify future activities

Agenda

Item	SWIM COI	Title	Time
1	all	Welcome, Objectives, Agenda,	0900
2	all	Review of the year and specification status	0915
		Coffee	1000
3	all	Update on tasks	1020
4	all	Review of /wiki/spaces/SCOI/pages/59606150 in service development	1050
5	SITCOM	Review/approval of candidate better practices. See /wiki/spaces/SCOI/pages/59605993	1130
		Lunch	1200
6	SITCOM	Work on FAQ - Semantic correspondence	1300
		Coffee	1430
7	all	Discussion on next year's activities	1450
8	all	Any other business	1535
9	all	Close	1600

These sessions are most relevant to those interested in the information aspects of SWIM. However, they are useful to those developing services.

1. Welcome

2. Retrospective & Specification status

What went well

Comments handled by the group; dialogue on comments; the Confluence tool.
Supporting material and related discussions are helpful

What could be improved

JSON Schema comes as a surprise. Not only is it a different format (JSON instead of XML), but the structure and ordering is different and requires analysis to see mapping.
Examples should come in JSON as well. Including their conformance assessment.
Participants have put their internal work on XML service descriptions on hold. Waiting to know whether the Registry would accept XML as well.
Question raised is Why JSON?
There is a lack of coordination with other groups such as EUROCAE WG104 and Registry CCB. This raises concerns. This seems like SWIM stove pipes. The SWIM related activities need be more coordinated. One example is where is the format discussed.
The SWIM implementation workshop should have brought a better visibility to the SWIM COIs.
Could we bring together the various COIs and CCBs?
Registry decisions have a big impact. Suggestion is to have debrief from Registry in next meeting, that would bring clarity and answers to questions (no need for marketing). Eg on Example, conformance, list of Schemas in Registry, …
Level of engagement of some members.

3. Update on tasks

Task Evolving the handbook

4.-6. Work items

4. /wiki/spaces/SCOI/pages/59606150

The content was seen as a good starting point. It needs to be updated to ensure consistency with the ICAO SWIM Manual once that is available. Work should continue on these pages next year.

The change request for IWXXM should be raised. The decision was to support the change of the namespace for the IWXXM-AIXM profile.

It would be good to have a list of:

extensions to the standardised information exchange models
models other that the standardised information exchange models

5. /wiki/spaces/SCOI/pages/59605993

The content of Understanding and recording mappings can be moved to supporting material. Minor edits are to take place before that: improve the title, remove the assumptions as they are no longer relevant.

The content of the Recording metadata required by the specification can be moved to supporting material. Minor edits are to take place before that: make it clear that all of the options are allowed, add a table outlining the benefits of each option, fully incorporate the example from Using ISO 19115 for Information Definitions.

6. Semantic correspondence training material

Notes were added to the page to outline the work required in this area.

7. Next year's activities

Evolving objectives & activities

Elements flowing out of the discussions

Registry needs to be made live.
- Risk exists however that it will be full of services that nobody uses.
Operational use may be slow to pick up at least in ATM. UTM may be quicker
- geofencing initiatives may not be aligned
nice to look at WFS for METAR services
identify simple use cases where SWIM makes an impact (eg should we be starting with UTM?)
make the conformance evidence a stronger requirement
check the registry conforms to the specs
consider PANS - it will lead to service overviews
still focus on the "used effectively" part of the initial objectives. The word support is too strong, it is give advice and highlight advice.

Meetings

Participants opted for joint progress meetings on Monday 2pm every 6 week. Invitation will follow

Send webex invitation Former user (Deleted)

For other meetings (technical webex or F2F), it would be useful to separate Service subjects from Information subjects, as not everyone is interested in both.

8. Any other business

9. Close

Browser not supported