European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Mapping Layers to be provided by INSPIRE view services to ERML-Lite

The Data Specification on Mineral Resources – Technical Guidelines v3.0 section 11.0 tells us that Layers to be provided by INSPIRE view services are:

Layer Name Layer Title Spatial object type(s) Keywords
MR.Mine Mines MiningFeatureOccurrence Mineral resources, Mine, Ore Measure
MR.MineralOccurrence Mineral Occurrences MappedFeature (spatial objects whose specification property is of type MineralOccurrence) Mineral resources, Mineral occurrence, Commodity

 

ERML-Lite 1.0 gives us:

name type documentation ERML-Lite example document
MineView erl:MineViewType A class to specify a simple view of a Mine feature for use in Web Mapping Service GetFeatureRequest responses or GML3.1 Simple Feature Level 0 Web Feature Services example
CommodityResourceView erl:CommodityResourceViewType A class to specify a simple view of an ERML Commodity feature for use in Web Mapping Service GetFeatureRequest responses or GML3.1 Simple Feature Level 0 Web Feature Services. example
MineralOccurrenceView erl:MineralOccurrenceViewType Class to specify a simple view of an ERML MineralOccurrence feature for use in Web Mapping Service GetFeatureRequest responses or GML3.1 Simple Feature Level 0 Web Feature Services. example
MiningActivityView erl:MiningActivityViewType A class to specify a simple view of a Mining Activity feature for use in Web Mapping Service GetFeatureRequest responses or GML3.1 Simple Feature Level 0 Web Feature Services. example
MiningWasteView erl:MiningWasteViewType A class to specify a simple view of a Mining Waste feature for use in Web
Mapping Service GetFeatureRequest responses or GML3.1 Simple Feature Level 0 Web Feature Services.
example

 

To provide the MR.MineralOccurrence "Layer" defined in 11.1 I originally thought I should use the erl:MineralOccurrenceView (adding the missing Endusepotential value in the any section ~ well adding an attribute after the shape attribute).

However reading section 11.3.2 Styles for the layer MR. Mineral Occurrence​ I see that recommended symbolization is by Commodity (which defines colour) and by Importance Value (which defines size of symbol) .

So in fact I should be using erl:CommodityResourceView with its erl:commodity (or erl:commodityClassifier_uri) and its erl:commodityImportance 

Is that correct?

There is no style at all for MR.Mine in the specification, so I assume that there are no issues with using erl:MineView​ as the basis for a view service.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Tomas LINDBERG

    By Tomas LINDBERG

    Did you ever manage to create and publish an "Inspire conformant" WMS for Mineral Resources, using ERML-Lite or just ad hoc layers? In that case, did you do ETL from the M4EU database provided in the project?

    We were planning to publish our M4EU dataset and WFS in our national portal as conformant Inspire resources, but would also need to create an WMS, ideally using ERML-Lite. I did a guick search in Inspire resources and didn't find much published (this may be me not finding my way in the INSPIRE Geoportal). It seems that most MS like us so far has been content with the M4EU and other geological portals, but I would assume that we also should publish our separate data and service the normal way.

    I will start a separate discussion on mapping from the M4EU database to WMS layers, but wanted to see if there has been som progress since your initial attempts.

     

     

     

  • James PASSMORE

    By James PASSMORE

    I updated our database to a version of PostgreSQL that allows materialized views and used a view of the M4EU complex data to create a WMS and simple feature WFS using MapServer.   We used ETL to get the data into the M4EU data structure initially but I haven't used any ETL to pull data out of the database, just attempting to use views...

    The services I have are:

    http://194.66.252.155/cgi-bin/BGS_EN_MINERALS/ows?service=WMS&request=GetCapabilities&

    http://194.66.252.155/cgi-bin/BGS_EN_MINERALS/ows?service=WFS&request=GetCapabilities&

    But really these are very much tests, and I will need to go back and visit the data/views/symbology.

    As far as using the recommended style for MR.MineralOccurrence, the problems are that the some of the endUsePotential terms are deprecated, and nobody populates the Importance values!  So we will need to come up with our own new recommended styles.

     

  • Tomas LINDBERG

    By Tomas LINDBERG

    That's a quick response, thanks a lot!

    I would love to get hold of those materialized views;)!! I appreciate that it is probably quite complex to create those flat layers from such a complex data model, and we were thinking we may have to settle for very simple layers to at least publish something. But maybe if you are thinking about revisiting and adding to those services we could also contribute from our side? I'm sure others would benefit also.

    Is the work you have been doing pure BGS, or do you know of any European work on this currently? I have not been involved technically since M4EU ended.

    I'll check your services in more detail, but at least managed to connect to the WMS so far...

    /Tomas

     

  • James PASSMORE

    By James PASSMORE

    Let me have another look at the views, and I'll give you anything that looks OK :)

    The effort here is a push by OneGeology to get minerals data more widely used.  Probably the first European service (INSPIRE compliant) to be published will be the service provided by GTK (Finnish Geological Survey)  providing data for the Arctic region.  We're working on it right now...

     

     

     

     

  • Jouni VUOLLO

    The question - how to do "Styles for the layer MR. Mineral Occurrence​ " based on the

    1. symbolization is by Commodity (which defines colour) and 2) Importance Value (which defines size of symbol).

    Minerals4EU (http://minerals4eu.brgm-rec.fr/minerals4EU/) don´t use INSPIRE symbolgy and EGDI (http://www.europe-geology.eu/mineral-resources/) just the symbology and colour of commodity.

    GTK (http://gtkdata.gtk.fi/mdae/index.html) have done some kind of try to build up the whole palette - also the commodity size based on the importance value. Then we did same to MR.Mine - INSPIRE DS document says - to be done. How to get uniform SLD's for INSPIRE Mineral Resource theme - who could do or who should do?

     

  • James PASSMORE

    By James PASSMORE

    and 3. symbol shape is defined by end use potential cataegorization...

    On the matter of SLD's  The primary issue is with the the SVG graphics for symbol shape, I think, but certainly I could have a go at creating them.  I already have MapServer STYLE definitions for colour and shape, but didn't do size for point data; some of our data isn't points but polygons, so not sure what the  guidance should be there ~ perhaps some repeated version of the point symbol?

    Of course on the matter of default styling for all data providers, do we also need to create ArcGIS layer files?  Does deegree use SLD? what about QGIS?

     

     

  • James PASSMORE

    By James PASSMORE

    OK, it appears that we can probably get away without SVG, so here's SLD ~ comments please...

    http://ogcdev.bgs.ac.uk/erml/MineralOccurrence.sld

    Note:

    I have tried to stick to the http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/codelist/EndusePotentialValue codelist to categorize / group the mineral commodities (determines symbol shape and colour).  I have not addressed polygon layers, or symbol size.

    AFAICT there is no formal relationship between the EndusePotentialValue and groupings of Commodities (which is to be expected because minerals may have multiple different end uses...)  In any case, where 'conflicts' arise I have gone by the description of the EndusePotentialValue, over any  http://resource.geosciml.org/classifier/cgi/commodity-code groupings.  See comments in SLD.

    For precious/semi-precious gemstones, there is no detailed description in EndusePotentialValue and the commodity-code doesn't distinguish between the two terms used in the technical guidance (precious/semi-precious), so in the SLD I have commented out those styles, and created a new colour (which is a blend of the red and blue...) to be used for a single class.

    I have created a new style for Building raw materials, dimension stones as there was no style in the TG.

    I have used <sld:WellKnownName> to define the symbol shapes, these named shapes were tested in GeoServer version 2.13.  I don't know if these will work in other versions of GeoServer, or indeed any other software that uses SLD to apply a style either internally or externally.

    There shouldn't be any duplicate commodity names, but...

    Please report back any issues, here or to onegeologyhelp@bgs.ac.uk

     

     

  • James PASSMORE

    By James PASSMORE

    If at first you don't succeed...

    I now have a second SLD that works to provide an internal style with GeoServer:

    http://ogcdev.bgs.ac.uk/erml/MineralOccurrenceForGS.sld

    It creates the following legend:

    INSPIRE Mineral Occurrence style (SLD) previewed in Geoserver

     

     

  • Tomas LINDBERG

    By Tomas LINDBERG

    Just a thought,

    as the layer organisation and styling in the TG are only recommended (apart from MR.Mine and the group layer(?) MR.MineralOccurrence) and the actual recommendations rather complex and difficult to figure out (many parameters to symbolize, what codelists to symbolize on, what level in the codelist to be used), would it be possible/preferable to come up with a slightly different "best practice"?

    I have not been able to look inte this in detail, but I would think that one layer (or group layer) based on MineralOccurrenceView and another layer (or grup layer) based on CommodityResourceView could be a good idea. As James pointed out it seems that symbology is based partly based on EndusePotential which is not present in either ERML Lite views, maybe it therefore should be avoided in the symboliszation (or added in Lite). 

    I don't know our data so well, but I see problems grouping commodities and symbolizing them with importance values, isn't the importance value associated with individual commodities? Or are there rules for this?

    We are planning to publish a view service this year, but will do most of the work after the summer (detailed mapping to layer views, and so on), but I could participate in a skype-meeting to discuss layer structure from now on, if there is any interest. You seem to be well under way, and may not be interested in any changes now.

    What do you think?

     

     

  • James PASSMORE

    By James PASSMORE

    Seems like a good idea to  collectively decide a revised best practice.

    We could tie this up with discussions from the ERML working group (next meeting in Vancouver on 14th June).  

     

     

Earth Science

Earth Science

Join this group to share your knowledge, learn and collaborate with INSPIRE Earth Science Cluster for Geology, Soils, Natural Risk Zones, Mineral resources, and Energy resources