Putting User Stories First: Experiences Adapting the Legacy Data Models and Information Architecture at NASA JPL's PO.DAAC to Accommodate the New Information Lifecycle Required by SWOT

The Surface Water & Ocean Topography (SWOT) mission brings together two communities focused on a better understanding of the world's oceans and its terrestrial surface waters. U.S. and French oceanographers and hydrologists and international partners have joined forces to develop this new space mission. At NASA JPL's PO.DAAC, the team is currently engaged in the gathering of SWOT User Stores (access patterns, metadata requirements, primary and value added product requirements, data access protocols, etc.) to better inform the adaptive planning of what will be known as the next generation PO.DAAC Information Architecture (IA). The IA effort acknowledges that missions such as SWOT (and NISAR) have few or no precedent in terms of data volume, hot and cold storage, archival, analysis, existing system engineering complexities, etc. and that the only way we can better understand the projected impacts of such requirements is to interface directly with the User Community. Additionally, it also acknowledges that collective learning has taken place to understand certain limitations in the existing data models (DM) underlying the existing PO.DAAC Data Management and Archival System. This work documents an evolutionary, use case based, standards driven approach to adapting the legacy DM and accompanying knowledge representation infrastructure at NASA JPL's PO.DAAC to address forthcoming DAAC mission requirements presented by missions such as SWOT. Some of the topics covered in this evolution include, but are not limited to:

How we are leveraging lessons learned from the development of existing DM (such as that generated for SMAP) in an attempt to map them to SWOT. What is the governance model for the SWOT IA? What are the `governing' entities? What is the hierarchy of the `governed entities'? How are elements grouped? How is the design-working group formed? How is model independence maintained and what choices/requirements do we have for the implementation language? The use of Standards such as CF Conventions, NetCDF, HDF and ISO Metadata, etc. Beyond SWOT… what choices were made such that the new PO.DAAC IA will flexible enough and adequately design such that future missions with even more advanced requirements can be accommodated within PO.DAAC.