European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Borehole part of the Data Specification on Geology - proposals from the EPOS project

Dear all,

The following proposal has been received from the 'Geological Information and Modeling' community of the EPOS implementation phase project, who have been working directly with the Geology Data Specification and more specifically, Boreholes.

Please post your responses to this proposal here.

Thank you and best wishes,



"During the EPOS project an analysis has been done on the Borehole part of Geology Data Specification and also to expose in first step the data as GeoSciML-Lite BoreholeView dataset, comparable with Geology ThematicClass for Borehole.

We have identified some misalignment within the specification between the terminology code-list and the list of symbols available.

  1. In the BoreholePurposeValue (that is one of mandatory element of Borehole (ref. Annex C pages 175-178)) the term “heatStorage” is missing in BoreholePurposeValue style (ref. pages 124-125)
  2. In addition in BoreholePurposeValue Style there is a value for ‘Shallow methane production’ but there is no associated value in the Code-list. We therefore propose to add this value to the code list.
  3. Moreover the EPOS community, based on the data available at different level, has identified the need to add a new term in the list to identify the scientific drilling and it has suggested adding “MultidisciplinaryScientificDrilling” to represent all the oceanographic scientific exploration.

The new complete Code-list suggests:




Contingency water supply



Drinking water supply

Emergency water supply

Environmental monitoring

Exploration and exploitation of energy resources

Exploration and exploitation of nonmetallic mineral deposits

Exploration and exploitation of raw material

Exploration of natural underground storage space

Flowing shot

Geochemical survey, analyses

Geological survey

Geophysical survey

Geotechnical survey

Geothermal energy

Groundwater level monitoring

Heat storage

Hydrocarbon appraisal

Hydrocarbon exploration

Hydrocarbon production

Hydrogeological survey, water management

Industrial water supply


Mineral exploration and extraction


Multi disciplinary Scientific research

Pedological survey

Pollution monitoring



Shallow methane production

Shot hole

Thermal cleaning

Water quality monitoring

Water supply


4. In the other hand if we are looking the BoreholePurposeValue style (ref. pages 124-125) we identify that one term available in the code-list isn’t represented as well, the “” haven’t real symbol. Therefore taking in account the new add elements of BoreholePurposeValue code-list we propose to improve the style with some new symbols.

The EPOS and EGS (EuroGeoSurveys) communities have proposed some new symbolisation based on the effective SLD generation. Moreover these communities have identified quite useful also the boreholeLength property to represent with different colours (proposing a colour ramp) different length of exploration also to identify in a view service very easily, which is the potential information associated to the borehole. This extra representation is not mandatory, but improves the quality of styling, in fact the new symbols are composed by a base element that follow the general representation presented in Data Specification Technical Guideline v.3.0 and add the colour just for the length attribute.

The new representation symbol schema is presented below:



    By Carlo CIPOLLONI

    Dear All,

    I attach here also the SLDs that we have developed in the EPOS project, the unique difference at the moment is in the boreholeLength attribute that in our extension model is called boreholeLength_m rather the boreholeLength in the INSPIRE Data Model. The EPOS BoreholeView is an extension of GeoSciML-Lite OGC data model.

    BoreholeView SLD version 1.0 BoreholeView SLD version 1.1

    Comments are welcome, thanks.


  • Tilman BROCK-HESSE

    By Tilman BROCK-HESSE

    Dear colleagues,

    In the introductory paragraph you say "suggested adding “MultidisciplinaryScientificDrilling”", but both the table and the symbology state it's "multiDisciplinaryScientificResearch".

    I would prefer "multidisciplinaryScientificResearch", without camelcase in multidiscilplinary.

    Also, I cannot see the proposed parent elements for your 3 added values. The table seems to be truncated on the right.

    I otherwise see no problems with the proposal.

    Best regards,


  • Sylvain GRELLET

    By Sylvain GRELLET

    Dear all,

    Following on that thread,
    Now that we have implemented GeoSciML-Lite BoreholeView and start exchanging summary borehole information, we are moving forward in the process.
    Summary borehole information will have to point to richer information flows at dataproviders level (see an overview here :

    We are discussing various data specification options (INSPIRE:Geology, GeoSciml4.1, GroundWaterML2, etc...) to fulfill this.

    We are not aware of any running endpoint providing Borehole as specified within INSPIRE (not GeoSciML, just the INSPIRE spec)
    Did an organization following the cluster already implemented it ?


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