RGS activity register

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N
1							Inlcuded as a requirement in specification?	Approval process and status
2	Date proposed	Item ID	Status	Item type	Owner	Description		Decision proposed date	Review period ends date	Status after review	Resolution	Supported in information model?	Tested in implementation (in IE)?	Tested in IE?

3	21/6/2012	rgs-01	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Generalised conversion relationships are implemented rather than Stage/Flow only relationships. This enable relationships between user specified parameters to be defined.	Y					Y	Y	Yes. Existing structures are flexible for different parameter conversions.
4	21/6/2012	rgs-02	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The WML2 RGS implementation contains data used to complete the calculation of derived information. The definition of the process that would be employed to complete the transfer function / transformation is not currently in scope, my may be in scope at a later revision	Y					Y	Y	Yes, current implementation reflects this.
5	21/6/2012	rgs-03	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Communcating the gaugings used in the creation of a rating is in scope. The gaugings if interest are * Gaugings used that were taken in the period of application of the rating * Gaugings not used that were taken in the period of application period of the rating * Gaugings used that we taken outside the application period of the rating. - e.g. high flow rating	Y					Y	N	The information model supports this. However the implementations do not. This is becuase the underlying information systems currently do not tracl this information.
6	21/6/2012	rgs-04	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The inclusion of user specified user information that varies across the Y scale of a conversion is in scope. This would be used to give further information for the conversion. e.g. Control/Chanel/OverBankFlow Assessment of other sensor application range						Y	N	RANGE VALUES - TODO.
7	21/6/2012	rgs-05	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Ratings should always have a point table supplied that is expanded at a sufficient Y scale resolution to enable linear interpolation between the supplied points. The creator of the data file will choose the export resolution such that linear interpolation is appropriate.	Y					Y	Y	Yes. This has been tested and seems to be a reasonable solution. Do we need a metadata element indicating the resolution that they have been expanded at?
8	21/6/2012	rgs-06	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Ratings may have the equation that is the source system definition of the rating. This may be supplied using rgs-4.	Y				Capability delivered though range value tables	Y	N	Yes, supported in the information model. No implementation examples exist, yet.
9	21/6/2012	rgs-07	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	A point rating table may have additional information that enables the source system to describe how it stored the table.	Y					Y	N	Yes, supported in the information model. No implementation examples exist, yet.
10	21/6/2012	rgs-08	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The implementation of loop rating curves is out of scope. Methods of implementation are possible, however the practical uptake of loop ratings means the topic is very much an edge case. It is understood that issues of uncertainty outstrip the accuracy issues that loop ratings address. Technology has provided other solutions through the use of velocity index tables and velocity sensing hardware.						NA	NA	N/A - scoping.
11	21/6/2012	rgs-09	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Reverse conversions are not supported implicitly by either point or equations conversions. Reverse conversions can be defined explicitly.						Y	Y	Supported by reverse tables.
12	21/6/2012	rgs-10	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Ratings are keyed to a Site / Point / ParameterFrom / ParameterTo.	Y					Y	Y	Yes. We changed this approach for a while but now key on MP/paramFrom/To.
13	21/6/2012	rgs-11	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	When defining stage as a parameter for a conversion, the stage datum must be supplied.	Y					Y	N	Yes supported by information model. Not tested directly by the IE.
14	21/6/2012	rgs-12	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Scope decision : The ratings being communicated are the 'Active ratings'. The ratings that would be applied to determine ParameterTo value. It will have been shift corrected and will be the active rating at the time. Return should indicate the date and time for wich the data applied
15	21/6/2012	rgs-13	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The use of conversion transitions / phased change is in scope	Y					Y	N	Supported by information model, but not tested directly in information model.
16	21/6/2012	rgs-14	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The use of start dates for a conversions period is agreed.	Y					Y	Y	Yes, conversion period start dates were the primary rating period approach.
17	21/6/2012	rgs-15	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The use of end dates for a conversions period is agreed. The end dates is purely used for describing a gap. Rating gap periods can be implemented by end dates a or a null rating.	Y					Y	N	Yes implemented in the IE, but an explicit end date was not tested?
18	21/6/2012	rgs-16	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Rating point quality codes will be implemented at the point level. A rating quality can be defaulted with overrides for each point. Rating quality can be applied to equations. Rating quality can be communicated via an input range.	Y					Y	Y	Yes point quality for tables is supported in information model and implemented in the IE. A range values approach has not yet been tested.
19	22/6/2012	rgs-17	Open	Action Item	Paul Sheahan	Complete a first draft of the RGSWG activity schedule for the next 12 months.		31/08/2012		Key milestones have been noted as the most important part -- the underlying modelling will progress to deliver on these milestones. Identifying the key topics for review from RGS group is important (not just review the whole model).
20	22/6/2012	rgs-18	Open	Decision	Reading group	Governance details developed		22-Jun-2012	6-Jul-2012
21	22/6/2012	rgs-19	Closed	Action Item	Peter Taylor	Create RGS WG email list
22	22/6/2012	rgs-20	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Conversions can specify Y scale range validated range (within rating), extrapolated range, beyond extrapolation.		26/7/2012			Should a range table wit ha predefined name be used to provide this functionality?	Y	N	Supported in information model, not tested in IE.
23	22/6/2012	rgs-21	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	There is a need for defining an input range purpose. An input range purpose should be a controlled vocabulary, the semantic meaning of each input range purpose should be defined against the vocabulary. Input range contents may vary over time, so should be referenced by periods of applicability.						Y	N	Partially duplicating range values requirement.
24	22/6/2012	rgs-22	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The format should enable the inclusion of metadata to enable the communication ratings approval and review process	Y					Y	N
25	22/6/2012	rgs-23	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	The application of 3d ratings is a stretch gaol. As such it is out of scope until scope is reviewed								Needs review
26	22/6/2012	rgs-24	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	We supply conversion information that is able to be used in simple or complex conversion chains. Communication of information that defines the 'chain conversion process' or 'work flow' of simple or complex chain conversions in not in scope.						NA	NA	Scoping
27	22/6/2012	rgs-25	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Reading group	Specific methods for the communication of uncertainty information are not currently agreed across the domain. This is an area of current domain development. The standard should be sufficiently extensible to enable incorporation when a direction is available.						Y	Y
28	22/6/2012	rgs-26	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	A RatingObservation is a summary result of the gauging activity, it is not a detail of the measurements taken to determine the gauging result.
29	22/6/2012	rgs-27	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	RatingObservations need to be connected to the rating for which they apply. This may be by direct, linked or other methods
30	22/6/2012	rgs-28	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	The rich suite of USGS site visit information is out of scope for this activity
31	22/6/2012	rgs-29	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	Rating type specialised metadata. Stream discharge RatingObservations have specific metadata that is of value and should be communicated. Other ratingObservations would not be required to contain this information.
32	22/6/2012	rgs-30	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	RatingObservations may be used by one or many ratings.
33	22/6/2012	rgs-31	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	Rating type specialised metadata. A WQ sepecialsed type is in scope as a stretch gaol. External input would be required to determine the content
34	22/6/2012	rgs-32	Open	Action Item	Paul Sheahan	A high level description of the WML.P2 purpose should be written. This description will enable user to understand the WML2.P2 purpose and assess it against their needs to determine if it is appropriate to their usage.
35	22/6/2012	rgs-33	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	A RatingObservation contains a definition of From and To parameters. The observations is not limited to stream discharge observations.
36	22/6/2012	rgs-34	Ongoing	Scope decision - Gauging	Reading group	RatingObservations must be able to be delivered seperate from ratings. Rating observation may optionally be delivered inline with rating details
37	22/6/2012	rgs-35	Ongoing	Scope decision - Sections	Reading group	The WDTF model can be used as a base definition of requirements.
38	17/8/2012	rgs-36	Ongoing	Scope decision - Rating	Paul Sheahan	The conversion application period list may refer to a conversion table more than once. e.g. a conversion table is reused		31/08/2012		Accepted - 19/9/2012		Y	Y
39	17/6/2012	rgs-37	Open	Scope decision - Rating	Paul Sheahan	A range value may refer to to a specific value, rather than a range. An example is references to flood extent polygons, the flood extent relates to a specific Y scale value and is not valid for a ranged of Y values (the range is vary narrow).		Next meeting
40	13/11/2012	rgs-38	Open	Question - Rating	Peter Taylor	Does a coversion always apply to the same ParamFrom? /ParamTo and Site/MonitoringPoint? RGS 36. There was discussion of engineered structures and conversions that are re-used across sites, e.g. flume relationships. How do these get identified? For actual use they would be 'bound' to a site. Response :		Next meeting		Accepted 14/12/12 telcon	Tying a conversion to a monitoring point is acceptable, the use of generalised conversions across several sites is not supported. There is a need to get better defintion around a site(consists of several monitoring locations)	NA	NA	Scoping
41	13/11/12	rgs-39	Closed	Action Item	Peter Taylor	Need a glossary. What are: Conversions, Ratings, Gaugings and where do they differ? This should reflect in the class naming (that needs some refinement for consistency).					created at http://external.opengis.org/twiki_public/HydrologyDWG/RGSGlossaryOfTerms
42	13/11/12	rgs-40	Open	Question - Gaugings	Peter Taylor	Metadata for including/excluding gauging observations as references. Do we need the reason they were excluded/included? Examples of this in practice? We modelled this but not currently shown in the above model.				Out of scope 14/Dec/12 telcon	This was considerd to be an stetch goal that may be included in a next version.
43	29/11/12	rgs-41	Open	Question - Ratings	Peter Taylor	RE : rgs-22 Should we define a vocabulary supporting conversion release status? Do we want to harmonise an initial set of codes? NWIS ones here: http://water.usgs.gov/XML/NWIS/5.0/ReferenceLists/DataAgingList.xml				To be included - 14/Dec/12 Telecon	A vocabularly should be defined.
44	29/11/12	rgs-42	Open	Question - Ratings	Paul Sheahan	re rgs-7. Is there a need to implement shifts to enable the actual source system representation? Is rgs-7 a free form extension point that would implement a specific data systems information model?				Out of scope 14/Dec/12 telcon	Any representation of shifts would need to completed within extension to enable a user system data to be communicated - out of scope for the core model.
45	30/8/13	rgs-43	Closed	Question ratings	Paul Sheahan	The ratings model should support the ability to determine if a rating has changed since last acquired. e.g. Date of last modification stored against period?		20/9/13	27/9/13	Agreed	Agreed at telecon 27 Sep 2013
46	30/8/13	rgs-44	Closed	Question ratings	Paul Sheahan	Should a rating table have an optional element of 'UseByDate'? Where a web service call delivers the 'current' rating, how long should it be used before being considered to be stale?		20/9/13	27/9/13	Rejected	Agreed at telecon 27 Sep 2013
47	19/9/13	rgs-45	Closed	Question ratings	Paul Sheahan	Change RGS-12 to "The ratings being communicated are the 'Active ratings'. The ratings that would be applied to determine ParameterTo value. Return should indicate the date and time for which the data applied"			27/9/13	Change to include actinve + ActiveShifted	Agreed at telecon 27 Sep 2013			Revised wording : The modelling of ratings will support the capture of Ratings and Shifts. Transfer documents will support the transfer of this information, additionally, transfer documents will support web service calls that deliver the ‘current rating’. In an organisation that uses rating shifts, this would be a shifted rating. The document should have the ability to indicate that the latest rating has been provided along with its shift status.
48	19/9/13	rgs-46	Closed	Question ratings	Paul Sheahan	New ratings requirement proposed : "The support of stage and time shifts is in scope for the Ratings model"			27/9/13	Agreed	Agreed at telecon 27 Sep 2013
49		rgs-47
50		rgs-48
51		rgs-49
52		rgs-50
53		rgs-51
54		rgs-52
55		rgs-53
56		rgs-54
57		rgs-55
58		rgs-56
59		rgs-57
60		rgs-58
61		rgs-59
62		rgs-60
63		rgs-61
64		rgs-62
65		rgs-63
66		rgs-64
67		rgs-65
68		rgs-66
69		rgs-67
70		rgs-68
71		rgs-69
72		rgs-70
73		rgs-71
74		rgs-72
75		rgs-73
76		rgs-74
77		rgs-75
78		rgs-76
79		rgs-77
80		rgs-78
81		rgs-79
82		rgs-80
83		rgs-81
84		rgs-82
85		rgs-83
86		rgs-84
87		rgs-85
88		rgs-86
89		rgs-87
90		rgs-88
91		rgs-89
92		rgs-90
93		rgs-91
94		rgs-92
95		rgs-93
96		rgs-94
97		rgs-95
98		rgs-96
99		rgs-97
100		rgs-98