Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

In+ersec+ion for Spatial People

Earth Observation Satellites Wikipedia Table Project

posted by Satri on Tuesday July 04, @08:17AM   Printer-friendly   Email story  Permalink  Trackback URI  Slashdotthis  Diggthis  Del.icio.us
from the sharing-the-workload dept.
Ask Slashgeo Satellites & sensors
About five years ago, I generated a summary table for Earth Observation satellites. This table is somewhat obsolete and as you might guess, requires efforts to maintain. I though a few times about converting the table into a wiki table in order to share the workload and allow frequent updates... maybe now it's time to act! Prior starting the conversion, I'd like your advice! Here's what I found: there's already a list of Earth observation satellites on wikipedia, but a list does not give you a quick overview of characteristics and differences. We also have resources, some wiki tables can be more or less complex and large. What do you think? Is this a good idea? Shall we keep breaking the sensors into groups such as "high resolution", "multispectral", "radar", "hyperspectral", etc (see ARSIST). What should be the rules? Earth Observation only? 1km resolution or better? Oh yeah, one last thing... I'd really appreciate some help! Anyone's interested? :-)

Related Stories

Industry: ESRI Creating and Editing Articles on Wikipedia? 2 comments [+]
geognerd writes "I was looking at and making some minor edits to a few GIS-related topics on Wikipedia. Something in the edit history of those pages caught my eye. A user called "Redlands" has made 37 contributions to GIS articles since Sep 21 of this year. These articles range in subject from Jack Dangermond to ArcGIS Server. Many of the contributions include links to ESRI's website or projects they are affiliated with, like the National Geographic MapMachine.

"Redlands" is also the creator of the Wikipedia article for GIS Day and has made all of the edits thus far. The same holds true for the article on ArcWeb Services, ArcGIS Server, and ArcExplorer.

This is a curiosity. I wonder if "Redlands" is an ESRI insider, an employee of their marketing department, someone at the University of Redlands, or someone who just likes the name Redlands. Ethical questions could be raised if these articles were written by ESRI. For example, the edit by "Redlands" to the Spatial Data Analysis and Spatial Database articles contributed little more than a link to the ESRI Press website."
Comparison of GIS software in Wikipedia [+]
Spatially Adjusted links to the Comparison of GIS software wikipedia page. The table is incomplete and sometimes erroneous, but it's a good start. Knowledge sharing is always a good thing if you ask me. Remember, you can sort html tables using the TableTools Firefox extension. There's also the Wikipedia list of GIS software.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Earth Observation Satellites Wikipedia Table Project | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 10 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • Earth Observation Satellites overviews

    (Score:2, Informative)
    by hermen (515) <hwesterbeeke@geosec.org> on Wednesday July 05, @03:22AM (#786)
    ( http://www.earthobservations.org/ )
    Two excellent resources:

    The UCS Satellite Database: http://ucsusa.org/satellite_database [ucsusa.org]

    CEOS Earth Observation Handbook: http://www.eohandbook.com/index.html [eohandbook.com]

    hermen
    Group on Earth Observations
    www.earthobservations.org

    • Re:Earth Observation Satellites overviews

      (Score:3)
      by Satri (3) on Wednesday July 05, @08:50AM (#787)
      ( http://alexandreleroux.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday March 17, @05:07PM )
      Thanks hermen. This is two great sources :-)

      However, I still believe a wikipedia table would be useful since those two sources (amongst other sources cited on the ARSIST table) are often (1) too long and includes others sensors not used for Earth Observation, (2) does not provide "natural groups" of sensors (e.g. high, multi, hyper, radar, etc.), (3) doesn't provide pertinent URL (e.g. links to vendors or to download sites), (4) is not formatted in an easily readable layout, etc.

      What do you think?
      [ Parent ]

    • Re:Earth Observation Satellites overviews

      (Score:3, Informative)
      by rcrowsey (575) on Friday July 07, @09:24AM (#797)
      > While a Wiki page, particularly if it were complete and received > enough maintenance to stay up to date would be of value, it would be > somewhat duplicative of what Bill Stoney has put together and > maintains for ASPRS. > > See http://www.asprs.org/news/satellites/ [asprs.org] for a link to the PDF > document. It only covers land imaging satellites of 30 meter or better > spatial resolution. The current release, February 2006, includes basic > details for all, such as spatial resolution, spectral bands, launch > date and so on. It's a great resource for beginning a search/analysis > on what sensors/ satellites could be of value to your project, but > once you get past the first order outline in such an exercise you'll > need to consult the specific provider for details such as format > availability, geometric correction, radiometric corrections and the > like.
      [ Parent ]

      • ASPRS's list

        (Score:3)
        by Satri (3) on Friday July 07, @11:30AM (#799)
        ( http://alexandreleroux.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday March 17, @05:07PM )
        I agree, the ASPRS document is very informative. However, many things are missing, such as full spectral bands, revisiting time, cost, and probably the most important: links to websites for more information and/or download. This makes me believes the wiki table would be useful.

        Thank you for your comment Rick! :-)
        [ Parent ]

  • Sensor table

    (Score:2, Interesting)
    by nedhorning (574) on Wednesday July 05, @02:33PM (#791)
    I am interested in the feedback that you receive on this request. I'm working on setting up a similar repository for portable sensors (for airplanes and UAV's) and am trying to figure out a sensible way to create, maintain, and serve these data. I think a database is a good way to go but that is not as easy to set up as a wiki - especially if you want to allow users to modify the database contents and have the ability to roll back changes. An advantage of a database is that you could have a few default forms that would suite most requests for information and for people wanting something different they could specify the information they wanted to see in a table. A wiki on the other hand is much easier to set up for public participation. The drawback from my experience is that contributions to a wiki fall way down shortly after it is launched. Wikipedia is an exception. If you go with a wiki I think it would be best to have a page for each sensor and a table (or tables) similar to ARSIST summarizing the sensors. That way more detailed information is available for those that want it. The table can be used as a coarse filter that directs people to more information. If you decide to create wiki pages I would include a "comments" section so people can relate their own experiences with data from specific sensors and institutions serving those data. I think the way you have the sensors grouped in ARSIT is the way most people group sensors so I wouldn't change it.

    • Re:Sensor table

      (Score:3)
      by Satri (3) on Wednesday July 05, @04:14PM (#792)
      ( http://alexandreleroux.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday March 17, @05:07PM )
      Thanks Ned for your feedback! :-)

      "I'm working on setting up a similar repository for portable sensors (for airplanes and UAV's) and am trying to figure out a sensible way to create, maintain, and serve these data."

      If you choose a wiki table format for your project, I guess you'll be able to copy-paste parts of the one we might generate for Earth Observation satellites.

      "I think a database is a good way to go but that is not as easy to set up as a wiki"

      Databases and wiki tables are different both offering different advantages. I tend to go with a wiki table mainly for accessibility and update reasons. On wikipedia, I would be one of the many potential contributors to the table, the reduced responsability attracts me :-) Of course, a database would be way more convenient for searches and convenient in terms of flexibility.

      "If you go with a wiki I think it would be best to have a page for each sensor and a table (or tables) similar to ARSIST summarizing the sensors."

      On wikipedia, many sensors already have their own pages. It is just impossible right now to get an overview of available EO sensors on one page. That's what I want to do. Of course, it would make sense to link to the table from individual sensors pages.

      "If you decide to create wiki pages I would include a "comments" section so people can relate their own experiences with data from specific sensors and institutions serving those data.

      Interesting... maybe not directly in the table, since comments may take a lot of real estate, but that's a good idea :-)

      "I think the way you have the sensors grouped in ARSIT is the way most people group sensors so I wouldn't change it."

      Okay.

      Thanks for your comments Ned.
      [ Parent ]

  • Ready to contribute

    (Score:2, Interesting)
    by JB (577) on Saturday July 08, @06:38AM (#801)
    ( http://jb.henry.free.fr/ )
    Hello there,
    that's a great idea! Actually, I have tried to contribute a bit to the description of the most recent satellites in Wikipedia, more often in french than in english but anyway, it's always best when you have some other people making things moving forward!
    So I'm definetely interested to contribute and I think that Wikipedia could really be a good way to make it easily. The division using sensor types sounds rather fine but it might useful to have a multiple access to the same information, like with spectral characteristics or spatial resolution... people may wish to have different ways to get into such a huge table!

    Let's hope it will work out.

    All the best,
    JB
    --
    Jean-Baptiste Henry
    Research Scientist, Earth Observation
    VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland

  • Google Spreadsheet

    (Score:2)
    by Satri (3) on Monday July 10, @09:15AM (#804)
    ( http://alexandreleroux.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday March 17, @05:07PM )
    On the Applied-GIS-RS mailing list, Pierre Marchand said:
    "Why not have a look at Google Spreadhsheets as a potential solution to host and maintain your table ?

    It would allow you to share it with many while allowing changes to be made by people you authorize.

    Here's a link to the Google Spreadsheets tour [google.com]     "

    This is a good idea, however, there are several reasons to favor Wikipedia over Google as host. Wikipedia will index and allow internal references, while Google Spreadsheet won't. This has a huge impact on how many people may stumble upon, and thus use, the table.