Harris, Bernard | Search NASA

NASA NTRS2013

ISTP CDF Skeleton Editor

Basic Common Data Format (CDF) tools (e.g., cdfedit) provide no specific support for creating International Solar-Terrestrial Physics/Space Physics Data Facility (ISTP/SPDF) standard files. While it is possible for someone who is familiar with the ISTP/SPDF metadata guidelines to create compliant files using just the basic tools, the process is error-prone and unreasonable for someone without ISTP/SPDF expertise. The key problem is the lack of a tool with specific support for creating files that comply with the ISTP/SPDF guidelines. There are basic CDF tools such as cdfedit and skeletoncdf for creating CDF files, but these have no specific support for creating ISTP/ SPDF compliant files. The SPDF ISTP CDF skeleton editor is a cross-platform, Java-based GUI editor program that allows someone with only a basic understanding of the ISTP/SPDF guidelines to easily create compliant files. The editor is a simple graphical user interface (GUI) application for creating and editing ISTP/SPDF guideline-compliant skeleton CDF files. The SPDF ISTP CDF skeleton editor consists of the following components: A swing-based Java GUI program, JavaHelp-based manual/ tutorial, Image/Icon files, and HTML Web page for distribution. The editor is available as a traditional Java desktop application as well as a Java Network Launching Protocol (JNLP) application. Once started, it functions like a typical Java GUI file editor application for creating/editing application-unique files.

Chimiak, Reine↗

NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP) was favorably impressed by the operational risk management approach taken by the Human Research Program (HRP) Integrated Research Plan (IRP) to address the stated life sciences issues. The life sciences community at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) seems to be focused on operational risk management. This approach is more likely to provide risk managers with the information they need at the time they need it. Concerning the information provided to the SRP by the EVA Physiology, Systems, and Performance Project (EPSP), it is obvious that a great deal of productive activity is under way. Evaluation of this information was hampered by the fact that it often was not organized in a fashion that reflects the "Gaps and Tasks" approach of the overall Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) effort, and that a substantial proportion of the briefing concerned subjects that, while interesting, are not part of the HHC Element (e.g., the pressurized rover presentation). Additionally, no information was provided on several of the tasks or how they related to work underway or already accomplished. This situation left the SRP having to guess at the efforts and relationship to other elements, and made it hard to easily map the EVA Project efforts currently underway, and the data collected thus far, to the gaps and tasks in the IRP. It seems that integration of the EPSP project into the HHC Element could be improved. Along these lines, we were concerned that our SRP was split off from the other participating SRPs at an early stage in the overall agenda for the meeting. In reality, the concerns of EPSP and other projects share much common ground. For example, the commonality of the concerns of the EVA and exercise physiology groups is obvious, both in terms of what reduced exercise capacity can do to EVA capability, and how the exercise performed during an EVA could contribute to an overall exercise countermeasure prescription.

Norfleet, William↗