Introduction
We will develop a CEOS-ARD Assessor for self-assessment and review.
It consists of two interfaces: One for self-assessment (data provider assessing their products) and one for review of submitted self-assessments (e.g. by GA). It supports the whole process (iteratively), making it more efficient. Self-assessments are stored in a database.
Data providers can select the PFS(es) to assess against. They can upload supporting documents (e.g. metadata) and connect the requirements in the PFSes with specific components in the supporting documents. A growing set of automations will be made available, e.g. some level of validation. Self-assessments against new PFS versions can be based on previous assessments.
Reviewers can review the submitted self-assessments and see the connections between requirements and supporting documents that data providers provided. They can leave comments and approve / (temporarily) reject submissions. Multiple iterations are possible where data providers can improve their submission based on reviewer feedback.
Requirements
- XML Path / XML Schema
- JSON Path / JSON Schema
...
Server implementation
- Login via GitHub or Google Account
Tech stack:
- Extent CEOS-ARD Server, so Python as server language
- Move from SQLite to a different database
...
Client/UI implementation
Similar to CEOS-ARD Editor:
- Login
- Self-Assessments / Products (similar to workspaces)
- Editor
- Tree with categories & requirements
- Color coded depending on the status
- ...
- Assessment/Review pane
- Rendered requirement
- Comments from Provider
- Checkboxes [Reviewed/...] / Comments from Reviewer
- ...
- Metadata/Data panel
- Upload files
- Show files
- Select/Mark parts of the file
- ...
- Create connections between metadata and review (JSON/XML Path) etc
- Each review has to be approved by the reviewer. Only after approval the changes made (e.g. comments) get visible.
- After approval a summary is generated and shown to the reviewer. The summary is also sent via email to the provider. Before approval no communication is made.
Tech stack:
- Extend CEOS-ARD Editor
- Rename repo ceos-ard-editor to ceos-ard-ui or so
- Vue.JS 3, Vuetify, etc.
Building blocks
Additional information
- Flag whether a panel review is required or not?
- Weight of the requirement?
metadata
metadata is the entry point in the building blocks. Underneath we propose the following structure:
- List of "sub-requirements" with an id
- Human readable title from the document
- Additional comments/notes?
- Schema(s) - either generically or in JSON/XML Schema
- XPath [for SAR XML]/JSON Path/Pointer(s) [for STAC]
Introduction
We will develop a CEOS-ARD Assessor for self-assessment and review.
It consists of two interfaces: One for self-assessment (data provider assessing their products) and one for review of submitted self-assessments (e.g. by GA). It supports the whole process (iteratively), making it more efficient. Self-assessments are stored in a database.
Data providers can select the PFS(es) to assess against. They can upload supporting documents (e.g. metadata) and connect the requirements in the PFSes with specific components in the supporting documents. A growing set of automations will be made available, e.g. some level of validation. Self-assessments against new PFS versions can be based on previous assessments.
Reviewers can review the submitted self-assessments and see the connections between requirements and supporting documents that data providers provided. They can leave comments and approve / (temporarily) reject submissions. Multiple iterations are possible where data providers can improve their submission based on reviewer feedback.
Requirements
...
Server implementation
Tech stack:
...
Client/UI implementation
Similar to CEOS-ARD Editor:
Tech stack:
Building blocks
Additional information
metadata
metadatais the entry point in the building blocks. Underneath we propose the following structure: