Data Definitions issueshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues2024-02-04T15:04:05Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/69Publish DD M23.0 v0.26.02024-02-04T15:04:05ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Publish DD M23.0 v0.26.0Publish the M23.0 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition
This is an incremental delivery on the path to the platform M23 milestone.
There will likely be a M23.1 v0.26.1 to be merged into the official platform deployment. This one wi...Publish the M23.0 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition
This is an incremental delivery on the path to the platform M23 milestone.
There will likely be a M23.1 v0.26.1 to be merged into the official platform deployment. This one will be merged into master.Thomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/29Link the planned litholog to the wellbore and the wellplanning wellbore.2024-02-02T10:14:31ZjoudetLink the planned litholog to the wellbore and the wellplanning wellbore.to be able to use interpreted lithology for a well already realized. We need to be able to do the link between wellbore and planned lithology without creating an empty wellplanning well and wellplanning wellbore.
```json
"WellName": "Ex...to be able to use interpreted lithology for a well already realized. We need to be able to do the link between wellbore and planned lithology without creating an empty wellplanning well and wellplanning wellbore.
```json
"WellName": "Example Well Name",
"WellboreName": "Example Wellbore Name",
"WellplanningWellID": "namespace:master-data--WellPlanningWell:SomeUniqueWellPlanningWellID:",
"WellPlanningWellboreID": "namespace:master-data--WellPlanningWellbore:SomeUniqueWellPlanningWellboreID:",
"WellID": "namespace:master-data--Well:SomeUniqueWellID:",
"WellboreID": "namespace:master-data--Wellbore:SomeUniqueWellboreID:",
```https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/52Worked Example - Well Planning DDMS - related entities2024-02-02T10:13:16ZDebasis ChatterjeeWorked Example - Well Planning DDMS - related entitieshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/WorkedExamples/WellPlanning/README.md
1. Please provide complete E-R Diagram for full coverage of related entities. Currently, it shows Wellbore, HolSecti...https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/WorkedExamples/WellPlanning/README.md
1. Please provide complete E-R Diagram for full coverage of related entities. Currently, it shows Wellbore, HolSection and WellPlanningWellbore.
2. There is reference to some "donation". "_The worked example included with this donation..._". Is there a link to some PDF or other kind of file? Such as what is provided for Rock sample and Analysis.https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/68Patch M22 PlannedCementJob2023-12-11T06:44:48ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Patch M22 PlannedCementJob- [x] Apply the same patch to PlannedCementJob as with [commit 9104ca88af2c0f700840b134af760b1f0e0fa736 on the Schema service](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/604/diffs?commit_id=9104c...- [x] Apply the same patch to PlannedCementJob as with [commit 9104ca88af2c0f700840b134af760b1f0e0fa736 on the Schema service](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/schema-service/-/merge_requests/604/diffs?commit_id=9104ca88af2c0f700840b134af760b1f0e0fa736)
- [x] Update resourcesThomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/62M21-group-type Migrations2023-11-28T06:33:34ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]M21-group-type MigrationsCreate a preview branch for M21 previewing the changes implied by group-type migrations.
* Member GitLab issues [#543](https://gitlab.opengroup.org/osdu/subcommittees/data-def/work-products/schema/-/issues/543) and [#551](https://gitla...Create a preview branch for M21 previewing the changes implied by group-type migrations.
* Member GitLab issues [#543](https://gitlab.opengroup.org/osdu/subcommittees/data-def/work-products/schema/-/issues/543) and [#551](https://gitlab.opengroup.org/osdu/subcommittees/data-def/work-products/schema/-/issues/551)Thomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/67Patch M22 BusinessAssociate2023-11-28T06:32:43ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Patch M22 BusinessAssociate- [x] `data.Addresses[].PrimaryContact` is defined as empty object, which is a mistake; it should include AbstractContactUserProfile instead.- [x] `data.Addresses[].PrimaryContact` is defined as empty object, which is a mistake; it should include AbstractContactUserProfile instead.Thomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/66Publish DD M22 v0.25.02023-11-24T19:11:12ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Publish DD M22 v0.25.0publish the M22 content delivered by OSDU Data Definitionpublish the M22 content delivered by OSDU Data DefinitionThomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/65Patch M21 Sample Analysis Family/Type2023-10-28T04:12:10ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Patch M21 Sample Analysis Family/TypeBy mistake:
1. some SampleAnalysisType record ids contain `%20` (due to blanks in the code).
2. The SampleAnalysisFamily FlowAssuranceProperties should have been called FlowAssurance.By mistake:
1. some SampleAnalysisType record ids contain `%20` (due to blanks in the code).
2. The SampleAnalysisFamily FlowAssuranceProperties should have been called FlowAssurance.Thomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/64Publish DD M21 v0.24.02023-10-08T09:59:00ZChad LeongPublish DD M21 v0.24.0- [x] publish the M21 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition- [x] publish the M21 content delivered by OSDU Data Definitionhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/63Publish DD M20 v0.23.02023-10-06T05:52:50ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Publish DD M20 v0.23.0- [x] publish the M20 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition- [x] publish the M20 content delivered by OSDU Data DefinitionThomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/56Access Portal - alternate way of viewing catalogue - by Domain2023-08-27T13:35:17ZDebasis ChatterjeeAccess Portal - alternate way of viewing catalogue - by DomainProposal - current way of Navigation is great (E-R -> down to Master -> down to Wellbore).
However, provide an alternative so that user can start with "**Rock Sample and Analysis**" domain and drill down to
All Master entities for this ...Proposal - current way of Navigation is great (E-R -> down to Master -> down to Wellbore).
However, provide an alternative so that user can start with "**Rock Sample and Analysis**" domain and drill down to
All Master entities for this domain
All Reference entities for this domain
All WPC entities for this domain.
May be one long list alphabetically sorted but flagged suitably.
ConventionalCoreType (Reference)
...
Coring (Master)
...
RockSampleAnalysis (wpc)
...https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/35Queries about FileCollection.SegY - typical JSON payload2023-07-24T07:24:46ZDebasis ChatterjeeQueries about FileCollection.SegY - typical JSON payloadhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/dataset/FileCollection.SEGY.1.0.0.json
Real data as was provided by Seismic DDMS team.
[FileCollection.SEGY.json](/uploads/883ad6928eda124211b8f9b4a0736a1...https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/dataset/FileCollection.SEGY.1.0.0.json
Real data as was provided by Seismic DDMS team.
[FileCollection.SEGY.json](/uploads/883ad6928eda124211b8f9b4a0736a10/FileCollection.SEGY.json)
Question-1 : Unit of Measure for Inline, Crossline etc. "Unitless" is not in standard value list.
Byte (dimensionless) can be an option?
Question-2 : SshemaFormatType - SegY is not yet in standard value list.
Although there could be multiple records for different revision level of SegY. Right?
Question-3 : EncodingFormatType - What do you suggest?
```
"VectorHeaderMapping": [
{
"KeyName": "opendes:reference-data--HeaderKeyName:Inline:",
"WordFormat": "opendes:reference-data--WordFormatType:INT:",
"WordWidth": 4,
"Position": 189,
"UoM": "opendes:reference-data--UnitOfMeasure:Unitless:",
"ScalarIndicator": "NOSCALE",
"ScalarOverride": 0
},
```
cc - @Keith_Wall for informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/60Duplicate PreloadFilePath value on ingestion of File.Generics2023-07-04T12:44:13ZGorm-Erik AarsheimDuplicate PreloadFilePath value on ingestion of File.GenericsWhen ingesting File.Generics into OSDU, we are using the {OSDU_BASE_URL}/file/v2/files/metadata endpoint to create the File.Generic. In the body we are setting the PreloadFilePath value on data.DatasetProperties.FileSourceInfo.PreloadFil...When ingesting File.Generics into OSDU, we are using the {OSDU_BASE_URL}/file/v2/files/metadata endpoint to create the File.Generic. In the body we are setting the PreloadFilePath value on data.DatasetProperties.FileSourceInfo.PreloadFilePath as described in the schema. The file is created successfully but when we read out the record from Storage API there is a duplicate value for PreloadFilePath where it has both 'PreloadFilePath' with a capital 'P', and 'preloadFilePath' with a non-capital 'P'. We've tried to ingest a file with a non-capital 'preloadFilePath' as well, but it still comes out with both values when reading it back. We have also tried generating the File.Generic raw json object from our code and using this to create it directly from the metadata endpoint in Postman to disclose that our code is somehow meddeling with the object. This also comes out with the same result. It's also worth mentioning that we are running OSDU through Microsoft ADME.Om Prakash GuptaOm Prakash Guptahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/61Publish DD M19 v0.22.02023-06-30T15:32:45ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Publish DD M19 v0.22.0- [ ] publish the M19 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition- [ ] publish the M19 content delivered by OSDU Data DefinitionThomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/59Publish DD M18 v0.21.02023-06-30T08:36:59ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Publish DD M18 v0.21.0- [x] publish the M18 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition- [x] publish the M18 content delivered by OSDU Data DefinitionThomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/30ISV friendly attributes -- Projected / Extracted attributes2023-06-30T08:36:25ZGraham CainISV friendly attributes -- Projected / Extracted attributesThis Issue proposes a generalisation for treatment of Issues 26 and 27 that prooses that UWI and SpudDate be treated as special properties.
We acknowledge that ISVs and others need a standard way of finding UWI and SpudDate irrespective...This Issue proposes a generalisation for treatment of Issues 26 and 27 that prooses that UWI and SpudDate be treated as special properties.
We acknowledge that ISVs and others need a standard way of finding UWI and SpudDate irrespective of how the Platform owner has organised content. Further, the fact that UWI, for example, is typically a Facility Alias where the alias name may be CUWI, PUWI, TUWI also does not help.
Earlier OSDU versions contained a number of "special attributes" that were always available in a search response (UWI and SpudDate were included), and were referred to at the time as "projected and extended attributes". Personally, I always considered them as ISV friendly / convenience attributes. This "friendliness" was put aside (temporarily at the time, but it has become permeant) during the OSDU / OpenDES friction point discussions late 2019 / early 2020 just ahead of moving into R2/R3 development with the new code base.
That said, late in 2019 when R1 was released to Operators, it was agreed that the Data Definitions Committee would take responsibility for defining the “special attributes” that would always be available in a search response. The reasoning was simple. There were dependencies that were related to the relationships between different schemas; Well and Wellbore for example (namely Parent and Child). Also, since these attributes were NOT attributes from the Schemas themselves, they would need to be separately documented (but also in a Schema format). Finally, there were implications for the ingestion service, as it would need to "create/manage" these attributes. As such, there was a strong need to standardise the way these “special attributes” were declared in order to ensure that they could be handled in a generic manner by the ingestion service. The point about these "special attributes" is that they were computed by the ingestion service based upon a set of rules.
Originally, "special attributes" were treated under the banner of indexing, since the intent was to insure that all Schema attributes and apecial attributes were properly indexed and searchable. A method for indexing Extended Attributes was also available.
Here are some examples of “special attributes” that were associated with a Wellbore in R1. Not everything was perfect and there were some inconsistencies, but hopefully the intent is clear. There were special attributes for Name and UWBI. There were attributes indicating the Well name and UWI. You will also note by deduction that ingesting Logs, Markersets and Trajectories, for example, caused the Wellbore record to be updated with counters and pointer arrays.
<details><summary>Click to expand</summary>
`
"WellCommonName": "AME-102",
"WellUWI": "1028",
"WellSRN": "srn:master-data/Well:1028:",
"SpudDate": "1983-02-13T00:00:00",
"CommonName": "AME-102-S1",
"UWBI": "5017",
"WellboreSRN": "srn:master-data/Wellbore:7607:",
"WellLogCount": 0,
"WellLogSRN": [],
"WellboreMarkerCount": 1,
"WellboreMarkerSRN": [
"srn:work-product-component/WellboreMarker:67657777573843378679176b3a1ddda9:1"
],
"WellborePathCount": 1,
"WellborePathSRN": [
"srn:work-product-component/WellboreTrajectory:2b293633fea6464086b67ecd8016adcc:1"
]
}
`
</details>
With all that said, my point is that instead of raising issues to add an attribute or two and then needing to decide where to put them, perhaps we should simply revisit the past features outlined above with a view to bringing some of it back into play.
For info, Wipro did independently implement such features into an updated verison of the OSDU ingestion engine of R1 using "rules" defined for each datatype to demonstrate that it could be done. An extract from the Rules Definition file we used for Wellbore is included below as an example of how things were made generic:
<details><summary>Click to expand</summary>
`
"id": "Wellbore",
"ResourceType": [
"master-data/Wellbore"
],
"WorkProduct": {
"WellboreCommonName": {
"Query": "$.Data.IndividualTypeProperties.FacilityName"
},
"UWBI": {
"GeneratorMethod": "getElementOfArray",
"Inputs": [
"$.Data.IndividualTypeProperties.FacilityNameAlias[?(@.AliasNameTypeID == 'srn:reference-data/AliasNameType:UWBI:')].AliasName",
0
]
}
},
"CopyFromParent": [
{
"WellUWI": {
"Query": "$.WellUWI"
},
"WellCommonName": {
"Query": "$.WellCommonName"
}
}
],
"CopyToParent": [
{
"WellboreSRN": {
"GeneratorMethod": "addSRNToArray",
"Inputs": [
"$.WellboreSRN",
"$.SRN"
]
},
"WellboreCount": {
"Query": "$.WellboreSRN.length()",
"SuccessorOf": "WellboreSRN"
}
}
]
`
</details>https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/57Publish DD M17 v0.20.02023-05-03T08:55:54ZThomas Gehrmann [slb]Publish DD M17 v0.20.0- [x] publish the M17 content delivered by OSDU Data Definition- [x] publish the M17 content delivered by OSDU Data DefinitionThomas Gehrmann [slb]Thomas Gehrmann [slb]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/58WellLog:1.1.0 Multicurve loading2023-04-14T10:43:35ZJavier AlonsoWellLog:1.1.0 Multicurve loadingHi @gehrmann .
We are trying to load image log into OSDU platform through Wellbore DDMS but it looks we are doing something wrong (see snapshots below). Could you please guide us in the process or provide more detailed example on how to...Hi @gehrmann .
We are trying to load image log into OSDU platform through Wellbore DDMS but it looks we are doing something wrong (see snapshots below). Could you please guide us in the process or provide more detailed example on how to load a multicurve in OSDU?
**Las file**
![image](/uploads/0c0e519feb0936819a1540f1ca3af84a/image.png)
**OSDU WellLog template**
![image](/uploads/651173c56539e2e6cb265265c0227b0c/image.png)
Many thanks
Javierhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/36Worked example - SeismicTraceData - TextualFileHeader2023-03-27T05:39:14ZDebasis ChatterjeeWorked example - SeismicTraceData - TextualFileHeaderPlease provide example showing how 40 rows of 80 characters will be presented.
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/work-product-component/SeismicTraceData.1.0.0.json
Array of 40 elements, 8...Please provide example showing how 40 rows of 80 characters will be presented.
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/work-product-component/SeismicTraceData.1.0.0.json
Array of 40 elements, 80 characters each?
```
"TextualFileHeader": [
"Example TextualFileHeader"
],
```
Copying to @Keith_Wall so that Volve sample payload file can be suitably adjusted.
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/data-flow/data-loading/open-test-data/-/blob/master/rc--3.0.0/4-instances/Volve/work-products/seismics/load_seismic_trace_data_ST0202R08_PS_PSDM_RAW_PP_TIME.MIG_RAW.jsonhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/issues/37Worked example - SeismicTraceData - Spatial Point or Area2023-03-17T14:54:37ZDebasis ChatterjeeWorked example - SeismicTraceData - Spatial Point or Areahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/work-product-component/SeismicTraceData.1.0.0.json
Please indicate directives to use Spatial Point and spatial Area.
Our assumption is that SpatialArea i...https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/data/data-definitions/-/blob/master/Examples/work-product-component/SeismicTraceData.1.0.0.json
Please indicate directives to use Spatial Point and spatial Area.
Our assumption is that SpatialArea is more appropriate to represent coverage of 3D Post Stack data. Do you agree?
Is SpatialPoint kept for the purpose of Borehole seismic (VSP)?
Copying to @Keith_Wall for his information to adjust Volve sample payload suitably, if required.
Thank you