We need to revisit our metadata discussion.

John Sloan, you are probably best positioned to lead this discussion. We might start by becoming familiar with the Great Lakes Monitoring Metadata requirements. We could also set up a conversation with Paris Collingsworth, to discuss his process for determining the necessary meta data information. We would probably want to touch base with John Chick for his input.

Some questions we need to answer are

• Meta data is provided for water quality portal results, should we store and serve out all WQP metadata?
• UMESC doesn't really provide any metadata, are we comfortable sending users to the Quality Assurance Project Plan to locate Metadata of interest?
• For each sample, UMESC measures a suite of parameters, do we want to explore appending all UMESC parameters to the parameters we are serving out through GLTGO ?
• Continuous Monitoring data is going to have a different type of meta data than we might be used to, we need to get a better sense of the requirements for continuous monitoring metadata

ekratsch
ichapman
mpbrenna
kruideni