European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Implementation Spatial Scope/Priority Datasets codelists in GeoNetwork

When using description 'Example on how to use the GeoNetwork editor' (see: in GeoNetwork ( to fullfill technical implementation (see: for tagging data sets with the Spatial scope code list from INSPIRE metadata code list register we discovered several problems:

  1. GeoNetwork Editor encodes the values of the codelist in metadata-xml using locally stored *.rdf file instead of using the link to INSPIRE Registry where official codelist is stored XPath: /gmd:MD_Metadata/gmd:identificationInfo/gmd:MD_DataIdentification/gmd:descriptiveKeywords[6]/gmd:MD_Keywords/gmd:thesaurusName/gmd:CI_Citation/gmd:identifier/gmd:MD_Identifier/gmd:code/gmx:Anchor/@xlink:href)
  2. Metadata element attribute @xlink:href (../gmd:identifier/gmd:MD_Identifier/gmd:code/gmx:Anchor/@xlink:href) is encoded inside the gmx:Anchor element even though we are using the gco_CharacterString in Editor (“gear icon” button) for the encoding Both encodings are supported in the technical implementation.
  3. Metadata element gmd:CI_DateTypeCode must have publication value inside the xml-tag according to technical implementation and Geonetwork doesn’t encode the value inside the xml-tag

These points lead to difference in XML Metadata encoding and the technical implementation description. (see attached images)

Steps to Reproduce:

  1. Use GN or
  2. Reproduce the description from
  3. Compare XML Metadata encoding from GN and technical implementation from

Does this implementation also covers encoding of Priority Data Sets? Is the implementation for Priority Data Sets under still valid?
For Spatial Scope code list in INSPIRE Registry there is now (new?) available SKOS/RDF (Ready for Geonetwork), for Priority Data Sets there are only other formats avaliable. Why?

How to use GeoNetwork and codelists from INSPIRE-Registry correctly to fulfill all technical requirements?

We pusplished a corresponding Ticket in GeoNetwork GitHub

This discussion is closed.

This discussion is closed and is not accepting new comments.