-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
2021-03 Spatial reference system should not be required for Service records (Peter Parslow, Feb 2021) #21
Comments
Im not sure of the reasoning behind not including it? |
Example: when creating a record for a CSW (Discovery Service), what Spatial reference system should I say it supports? I suppose the boundingBox (if requested) has to be in WGS84, and the boundingBoxes of any responses would be, but that's not to say that any records returned by the CSW describe things that are only in WGS84. |
Network services would also include processing services like WPS and WCPS, where no Spatial reference system applies |
@nmtoken to check schematron rules |
@PeterParslow to check INSPIRE definition of Interoperable Spatial Data Services |
|
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014R1312#d1e118-8-1 “interoperable spatial data service” means an invocable spatial data service which fulfils the requirements of Annex VI i.e. “Invocable spatial data service” means all of the following plus conformant metadata. (a) a spatial data service with metadata which fulfils the requirements of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1205/2008 (5), (b) a spatial data service with at least one resource locator that is an access point, (c) a spatial data service in conformity with a documented and publicly available set of technical specifications providing the information necessary for its execution, |
testing correct way of marking up tagged regions
As so often, the matched PR seems unrelated. I think it is actually non-breaking in that we would relax the Obligation from "at least one" to "optional", so no currently-valid records would be made invalid. Do we now agree that it should be optional? |
Currently required for all services Agree that it should be optional for services unless it's a SDS; so will need to need to check for an SDS keyword in the schematron. Related to #78 ~ Will need an |
If we can test that, then the obligation should be "Conditional, required when describing an INSPIRE Spatial Data Service" |
Possibly confusing myself here, but do we need to change the Spatial data service type guidance Or are we now saying that not all service records are SDS, and therefore don't need a Spatial Data Service Type (and that this subset of service records don't need a coordinate reference system) Or are we saying that these service types define network services, and are required, but we have misrepresented them as Spatial Data Service Types. However
Discovery, View, Download are all included in the list of possible spatial data service types, and are also represented in the INSPIRE SpatialDataServiceCategory codelist with for example I changed the schematron to only check for a spatial reference system where hierarchyLevel is dataset or series, or where hierarchyLevel is service and there is a keyword from the INSPIRE SpatialDataServiceCategory, but considering that original test:
revised tests currently:
|
The INSPIRE Metadata Technical Guidance certainly implies that the 'network services' are (types of) spatial data service "Most of the metadata requirements for INSPIRE Network Services are contained in Conformance Class 3: INSPIRE Spatial Data Service baseline metadata. Though brief, this Conformance Class is added here to make clear which metadata requirements apply to Network Services." They then allow for other Spatial Data Services, like the ones listed at https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/SpatialDataServiceCategory:1. These "other" ones can then be invocable, interoperable, or harmonised - with each level adding extra metadata requirements. It's only at "interoperable" that they say to an SRS is mandatory. GEMINI is then tighter than that (I can't remember the original reasons!) requiring SRS on network services. We are now softening that a bit to not require them on all services (specifically, the ones known as network services). (I find the INSPIRE lists of SDS types far from ideal. For example, I don't know the difference between an SDS of type https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/SpatialDataServiceCategory/infoCatalogueService and an INSPIRE Discovery Service!) |
So all network services need an SDS conformity statement, and SDS keyword, and when the conformtity statement says the service is interoprable or hamonized it then needs a SRS |
I reckon that is the INSPIRE position. As mentioned above, we (GEMINI) have been more strict. |
We've been more strict on SRS, but don't yet check for the conformity statement and keywords. So not sure what to do with schematron rules. It will be a breaking change to check that all services have the keyword and conformity statement, the latter of which I will need to test to add a conditional check for when services need a SRS |
See INSPIRE TG C.3.1 - not required for Network Services (Discovery, View, Download)
See INSPIRE TG C.1.2 and TG Requirement 6.1: metadata/2.0/req/sds-interoperable/crs - there are Interoperable Spatial Data Services that should provide it.
See also 2020-21 (both!)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: