Change proposals on the ir on data interoperability received from ms and eea/eionet contents


Layers organisation section: populate with best practice



Yüklə 0,54 Mb.
səhifə8/8
tarix21.08.2018
ölçüsü0,54 Mb.
#73575
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8



3.2.5Layers organisation section: populate with best practice


Issue number: 2

Affected documents: TG,

Themes: Geology

Description: The Layers organisation section 11.1.1 was left blank in the v3 TG and best practice has been identified, documented and widely used to satisfy both View service IR and the needs of actual Geology user dataset layer Viewing.

Corrigendum: Page 108: Insert into empty section heading:

11.1.1 Layers organisation

Community wide practice has identified that the IR required layer name "GE.GeologicUnit" and layer title "Geologic Units" above does not describe logically the view of this dataset that normal users expect and require – which is very often a view of the dataset classified by .Lithology and/or by .Age. or for layers of the same type but at a different scale A practical solution has been implemented widely and become a community convention whereby the WMS service that provides these views expresses the GE.GeologicUnit layer name as a GROUP layer name with the user expected view layers under that group, expressed in the WMS GetCapabilities response and therefore callable by a user/software client.

This has been found to work with all commonly used WMS software which is configured such that:



  • --+ [SERVICE / ROOT LAYER NAME]

--> [ROOT LAYER TITLE]

--+--+ [GROUP LAYER NAME ~ follows data specification naming requirement]

-->--> [GROUP LAYER TITLE ~ follows data specification naming requirement]

--+--+--+ [LAYER NAME ~ layer of the data specification TYPE BUT following community convention]

...

For example:



--+ BGS_EN_Bedrock_and_Surface_Geology

--> BGS OGE bedrock and surface geology

--+--+ GE.GeologicFault

-->--> Geologic Faults

ABSTRACT: MappedFeature (spatial objects whose specification property is of type ShearDisplacementStructure)

--+--+--+ GE.GeologicFault.BGS.EN.1M.Surface

--+--+--+ GE.GeologicFault.BGS.EN.1M.Bedrock

--+--+ GE.GeologicUnit

-->--> Geologic Units

ABSTRACT: MappedFeature (spatial objects whose specification property is of type GeologicUnit)

--+--+--+ GE.GeologicUnit.BGS.EN.1M.Surface.Lithology

--+--+--+ GE.GeologicUnit.BGS.EN.1M.Surface.Age

--+--+--+ GE.GeologicUnit.BGS.EN.1M.Bedrock.Lithology

--+--+--+ GE.GeologicUnit.BGS.EN.1M.Bedrock.Age



  • The community concluded that this approach follows the IR at the service group layer whilst providing what real users want.

The Land Cover theme has identified exactly the same requirements including using these layer names to express the scale of the data viewable in the layer allowing different scales for the same data type to be expressed in a single service which the generic IR for all view services also wants to be available.


Discussion link: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/discussion/view/13952/layer-naming

Consolidated Geology proposal: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/file/view/163756/INSPIRE-dataspecification-ge-v30-geology-cluster-updates-v8-for-mig-t




3.2.6Geology codelist changes, styles – best practice


Issue number: 3

Affected documents: TG

Themes: Geology

Subject: make three changes to codelist/registry entries for codelist BoreholePurposeValue and add best practice on styling

Description: 1). heatstorage was already in registry needs adding to TG

2). Shallow methane production was already recommended in the TG but needs adding to the registry



3). multidisciplinaryScientificResearch is recommended to be added to the TG and the registry

Discussion link: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/discussion/view/130446/borehole-part-of-the-data-specification-on-geology-proposals-from-the-epos-project


Corrigendum: section 11.3.7 Styles for the layer GE.Borehole - Purpose of Boreholes – p124 onwards


heatStorage

c:\local\inspire_conference_strasbourg\heatstorage (1).jpg

114-w3  + 226-w2

hydrogeologicalSurvey

y162-w2

industrialWaterSupply

+ n163-w2 + 236-w2

irrigation

+ r163-w2 + 231-w2

mineralExplorationExtraction

i185-w2

mitigation

i156-w2

multidisciplinaryScientificResearch

c:\local\inspire_conference_strasbourg\multidisciplinaryscientificresearch.jpg

114-w3 + 443-w2

pedologicalSurvey

e195-w2

pollutionMonitoring

o88-w2

recharge

e167-w2

remediation

e152-w2

Shallow methane production

r176-w2




Style Name

GE.Borehole

Style Title

Borehole Depth Type

Style Abstract

The colour ramp is to differentiate based on BoreholeLength measure of a borehole depth.

A proposal was created for EPOS IP project. This colour ramp representation can be used in combination with the BoreholePurposeValue classification.



Symbology

See the colour table below

Minimum & maximum scales

None




Deep Range

Colour Ramp

Exagon code

RGB code

0-100

 

#F0FFFF

(240,255,255)

100,1-200

 

#73D7FF

(115,215,255)

200,1-500

 

#73F0FF

(115,240,255)

500,1-1000

 

#72A9FF

(114,169,255)

1000,1 - 2000

 

#3D59FF

(114,141,255)

2000,1 - 3000

 

#7170FF

(113,112,255)

3000,1 - 5000

 

#7154FF

(113,84,255)

5000,1 - 7500

 

#9C2AFF

(156,42,255)

> 7500,1

 

#CC2AFF

(204,42,255)















Consolidated Geology proposal: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/file/view/163756/inspire-dataspecification-ge-v30-geology-cluster-updates-v8-for-mig-t

3.2.7GeochronologicEraValue codelist change





Issue number: 4


Affected documents: TG

Themes: Geology

Subject: GeochronologicEraValue Definition: Terms specifying recognised geological time units.

Typographical updates to TG entries and registry entries and older/youger bound properties served by the registry


Description: 1). 12 upper/lower descriptions changes have already been made in the registry ( last June for the EGDI project) make changes in the TG - a final 13th was a result of the EGDI project – one final typographic edit change cambrianSeriesStage3Stage5 to cambrianSeriesStage5 in TG and registry (to fit all the other cambrianSeries values) .

2). Many older and younger bound values for each value (in Ma Millions of years) were unintentionally left in the TG and the registry at the ICS 2008 values, when perhaps a last minute decision was made to put in the IR that ICS 2012 values ( with different bound properties) were to be used. This means that ever since wide spread use e.g. in the EGDI project June 2016 when the INSPIRE registry codelist uri value is resolved by a real user of the data – the wrong bound properties are returned in the definition – and these bound values are the main properties of interest.

3). Change this page http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/document/ICS

External reference link http://www.stratigraphy.org/ICSchart/ChronostratChart2013-01.pdf - which points to 2013 not 2012 (nor 2008!)

 To point to the (IR mandated version) 2012 pdf instead (http://www.stratigraphy.org/ICSchart/ChronostratChart2012.pdf


Corrigendum: see tracked changes in pages 209 to 225 in v8 reference https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/file/view/163756/inspire-dataspecification-ge-v30-geology-cluster-updates-v8-for-mig-t


Discussion link: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/groups/profile/1813/geology#elgg-widget-content-8787 panel headed: INSPIRE recommended codelists for each Data Specification TG published on INSPIRE Registry 20/05/2015

Consolidated Geology proposal: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/file/view/163756/inspire-dataspecification-ge-v30-geology-cluster-updates-v8-for-mig-t

3.2.8Terms describing the lithology. – 6 typographic changes required in TG


Issue number: 5

Affected documents: TG

Themes: Geology

Subject: LithologyValue

Definition: Terms describing the lithology. – 6 typographic changes required in TG



Description: 6 textual typographic changes for recommended LithologyValues (recommended not IR values no IR changes) already made in registry last June needs changing to match in TG.

Old INSPIRE registry value :: new one

LithologyValue/alkali-OlivineBasalt :: LithologyValue/alkaliOlivineBasalt

/LithologyValue/anthrazit :: /LithologyValue/anthraciteCoal

/LithologyValue/arenit :: /LithologyValue/arenite

LithologyValue/glaukophanschiefer :: LithologyValue/glaucophaneLawsoniteEpidoteMetamorphicRock

LithologyValue/kalsiliticAndMeliliticRocks :: /LithologyValue/kalsiliticAndMeliliticRock

/LithologyValue/impaceu-technicaleneratedMaterial :: /LithologyValue/impactGeneratedMaterial


Discussion link: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/groups/profile/1813/geology#elgg-widget-content-8787

panel headed: INSPIRE recommended codelists for each Data Specification TG published on INSPIRE Registry 20/05/2015


Consolidated Geology proposal: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/file/view/163756/inspire-dataspecification-ge-v30-geology-cluster-updates-v8-for-mig-t

3.2.9Geophysics schema - change


Issue number: 6


Affected documents: TG

Themes: Geology

Subject: Geophysics schema

Description: The chairman of the original Geophysics schema defining committee requested 900+ days ago for a very minor change be made to Geophysics schema document (NOT the UML model) so that the schema was valid. He asks for NO other changes to the TG other than the schema to which it refers be fixed:

  • “Looking at the the geophysics core data model UML
    ( http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/data-model/approved/r4618/html/EARoot/EA2/EA2/EA2/EA3/EA1/EA7795.png ) you can see that data type should be MD_Distributor.

For some reason schema generation skipped this definition, leaving the element typeless. Any rubbish here would be validated, but it is safe to use an ISO MD_Distributor element, like here:

http://geonetwork.mfgi.hu:8080/wXmlDoc/getRecordById?id=SLN2D_HIII-K&format=inspire”




Corrigendum: page 102 change reference to geophysics schema 4.0 from 3.0:

Fix the schema as above.


        1. 9.3.14 Default encoding(s) for application schema Geophysics


Name: Geology GML Application Schema

Version: version 4.0,

Specification: D2.8.II.4 Data Specification on Geology – Technical Guidelines Character set: UTF-8

The xml schema document is available on the INSPIRE website



http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/schemas/ge_gp/4.0/GeophysicsCore.xsd

Discussion link: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/discussion/view/5164/for-geophysics-part-of-the-data-specification

Consolidated Geology proposal: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/file/view/163756/inspire-dataspecification-ge-v30-geology-cluster-updates-v8-for-mig-t




Yüklə 0,54 Mb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

gir | qeydiyyatdan keç
    Ana səhifə


yükləyin