Add FORCE to the algorithm catalog

[Hneuschmidt]

This PR introduces FORCE as an algorithm to the APEx algorithm catalogue.
The source for the FORCE EO Application package is contained in the apex-force-openeo repository

Important

Integration work on FORCE is still ongoing so details may change

It is still early to make FORCE fully available. However, I would like to start the process of integrating the record to make sure we have all metadata ready by the time the integration work is done.

@JanssenBrm David Frantz (author and maintainer of FORCE) and I were wondering who to mention as the "algorithm provider" in this case. Unlike (all?) the other examples in the APEx algorithm catalogue, this software is provided by a researcher at a university with no involvement by a company. We could add e.g. the university, the group or David as a person as the algorithm provider. Do we have a policy for these cases?

A few thoughts to consider:

• As I understand, David owns the IP
• University / Group association may change in the future, the IP moves with the owner

[algorithm-services-catalogue]

🔍 Catalogue's Preview Site Deployed

Your changes have been deployed to the preview site:

🔗 Preview URL: https://esa-apex.github.io/apex-algorithms-catalogue-web/pr-preview/pr-501/

This preview will be updated automatically when you push new changes to your PR.

[JanssenBrm]

@JanssenBrm David Frantz (author and maintainer of FORCE) and I were wondering who to mention as the "algorithm provider" in this case. Unlike (all?) the other examples in the APEx algorithm catalogue, this software is provided by a researcher at a university with no involvement by a company. We could add e.g. the university, the group or David as a person as the algorithm provider. Do we have a policy for these cases?

There are currently no policies in place for this. The role field is also a free-text field and you can add multiple contacts. I suggest to add David Frantz with the roles author and maintainer. If David also wants to mention the university or group this is also fine.

[Hneuschmidt]

Merge should wait until release 1.0 of the FORCE EOAP. However, the changes can be already reviewed @JanssenBrm .

[Hneuschmidt]

@JanssenBrm I believe unit test failures are now caused by pre-existing failures from the main branch.

A few things remain to be done:

• The schema requires an "application" link, I assume this is what will be opened by the "Execute Service" button. I have now added the example notebooks there, but there is no guarantee yet that they would run on Jupyterlite. For FORCE level 2 we could somewhat reasonably add a UDP that includes a query, but the combination of querying with openEO and FORCE level 2 is much more limited that FORCE level 2 itself, so I am not sure we should do that. What do you think?
• The FORCE custom processes force_level2 and force_tsa rely on the latest release of https://github.com/bcdev/apex-force-openeo, we should only merge once 1.0 has been released (I am working on that currently).
• I have added a description markdown document to both processes as I have seen in other places. I am not sure how this must be added to appear as the rendered description.
• It would be great to add the parameters of the force_level2 and force_tsa processes. Is it possible to link "built-in" processes like this (instead of a process_graph.json) somehow?