VT Science Gateway Primer/appdb

Project output - AppDB recommendations

Recommendations on how to improve the data structure of the EGI Application Database, to better support science gateway developers, are recorded in this wiki page. Preliminary UCST feedback on these topics are also provided.

1. Within the Science Gateways category we need two subcategories concerning the type of the gateway:

a. SG framework (Generic DCI gateway framework)

b. SG instance (Application-specific science gateway)

UCST comment

Science gateways (SG) and Workflow systems have been added as separate new categories on the AppDB portal interface. The science gateways listed in AppDB SG category unfortunately washes together the two subcategories that you mention. However, note that exactly these two subcategories are already separated within the database with tags, and they are presented separately on the EGI website http://www.egi.eu/services/support/science-gateways/index.html.

Note that we established the following terminology for these: - Science gateway - Science gateway enabling technology Please use this in the VT.

Given this background your requirement can be translated as Present the same two 'Science gateway' and 'Science gateway enabling technology' subcategories separately on the AppDB portal interface similarly how they are presented on the EGI website

How would you like this to be done? - Should the two subcategories be at the top level (where Applications, Tools, Science gateways and where Workflow systems are now)? Or - Should these two subcategories presented under the main Science gateway category? In this case should we use a different name to avoid that 'Science gateways' are used as a top level category and as a subcategory under this?

2. In both subcategories we need two subcategories concerning the status of the gateway:

a. Production level (available for external users)

b. Prototype level (tested by a selected set of users)

3. In both subcategories we need science subcategories like chemistry, biotechnology, earth, astrophysics, etc.

Use cases:

a. A typical scientist would like to search the data base in the following way:

"I am interested in an Application-specific science gateway that is in production in the area of astrophysics. Using the subcategories she can quickly to the right set of gateways containg only a small number of gateways that all satisfies her requirements."

b. A biotechnology gateway developer would like to see if there is any generic gateway framework that is in production and from which she can build a SG instance.

4. Free tags should be available. These could be used by the Science Gateways software for example to:

a. Define each application a specific SG is offering (Science Gateways can offer access to one or more software packs)

b. Provide a better categorization of a SG software register. For example, which enabling technology is the SG based on? Later on, this information will be valuable to assess how different technologies are being uptake by SG developers. We are aware of the AppDB gadget and that is easy to build customized AppDB queries.

5. An AppDB software (e.g. SG related entries) should be able to cross-reference with other software already in AppDB. For example, if a SG is based on the WS-PGRADE/gUSE enabling technology, then somewhere in the description of the SG this could be referenced.

a. We are aware that AppDB uses permalinks

b. Are there other ways this could be accomplished?

6. If a SG claims to be in production, an URL and usage policy should be available. A user expects to have at least this information available in order to assess if a certain SG is suitable for him or not.

Status

• Recommendations already recorded as a requirement in the EGI RT system (#4520).