Request For Comment: Raw Geophysical Data Schemas v2
We are delighted to announce the publication of an RFC that discusses potential changes to existing geophysical data schemas!
Check out a brief summary of the RFC below.
Title: Raw geophysical data schemas v2
Author: Michael Di Felice
Summary
The current "raw geophysical data" schemas are comprised of:
frequency-domain-electromagnetic(FDEM);time-domain-electromagnetic(TDEM);gravity;magnetics;radiometric.
These objects are unique in that they are intended to represent (primarily) data captured from surveys, conducted in lines. In their current form, they are heavily inspired by Oasis montaj “geodatabases” (“GDBs”).
There are a few matters that may need some cleaning up with the raw geophysical data schemas. Some of these are general, and span all raw geophysical data schemas (e.g., matters pertaining to coordinate representation within survey-line), while others are specific to a given particular schema/discipline (e.g., time-gate handling in EM schemas, or live/dead-time handling in the radiometric schema).
Motivation
The raw geophysical data schemas have yet to see wide adoption or integration into existing workflows. There are, at the moment, parallel streams of work which are attempting to contend with these schemas for the first time. In doing so, some of initial shortcomings are being brought to light.
We have a good opportunity to capitalize on the lack of adoption in these schemas and make necessary changes to make them usable & suited for our needs.
While some of the proposed changes do not necessarily constitute breaking changes, it is our recommendation to create a new version of these schemas altogether. We should also mark the 1.x.x of the raw geophysical schemas as officially "deprecated", so as to avoid investment/integration in them.
👉️ Click here if you would like to read the rest of the RFC and to join the conversation.
The evo-schemas repository is a great place to discuss new geoscience object schema ideas or to propose changes to existing schemas. We welcome all community contributions!
Comments
-
I feel IP/Res data (inversion or pseudo) should be part of the schema unless you are focussed on airborne data for now. In many poly-metallic deposits IP/Res forms part of the datasets.
3 -
Hi @AjayKumarSingh - first off, thanks for posting! I'm happy to report that we do have an IP/Res schema available in our geoscience object schemas (see below).
For this particular update, however, we've chosen to focus on some other varieties of our other "raw geophysical" schemas. Geoscience objects are constructed from a set of shared underlying components, which means that any improvements that are made in this particular update would automatically be available in the next released IP/Res schema. That particular schema has a very particular focus, so it wasn't bundled in this current round of updates.
Willing to chat further if you have any questions!
0 -
Hi Michael
Tx for the update & info. Let me check this out and revert pl
0
