European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

InspireID guidance for the INSPIRE priority datasets (and environmental reporting obligations)

As we (SK INSPIRE national contact point) were recently contacted by the colleagues responsible for the European environmental legislation reporting obligations with the request for guidance, how to collect InspireID for the particular reporting obligation, we would appreciate any guidance on EC level, as well as any experience from the other Member states.

Topic will be also proposed on the Action 2016.5: Priority list of datasets for e-Reporting, but any feedback is more than welcome.

For time being, we have recieved requests for the following reporting obligarions:

  • 91/676/EEC
  • 2010/75/EU ( EU Registry )
  • 2017/852
It might end up with the specific guidance for each reporting obligation, but if there will be some common, aspect, thanks in advance for reporting them via thic topic.


  • Stefania MORRONE

    By Stefania MORRONE

    Dear Martin,

    thank you for posting such an interesting topic.

    Quoting from the blueprint “Referencing INSPIRE in environmental reporting

    “It is absolutely necessary that the values of the INSPIRE identifiers are known to the environmental reporters. Clear rules for the creation and management of such identifiers, agreed at national or, even better, at European level, as well as information-sharing procedures for the departments in charge of the different related data flows would avoid potential reporting issues and/or inconsistencies”.

    You might find beneficial to read the following Forum post “gml:id, gml:identifier and the InspireID – Clarifications and Best Practices” with some examples from Germany, UK and France as well as links to experiences from Spain (creation of a National PID management system) and Romania (adoption of standardized PIDs and short URLs) 

    Currently, there is no specific guidance at EC level for the creation of the InspireIds .

    The creation of stable http URIs as identifiers for spatial objects and spatial data sets is only a recommendation :

    “ To keep INSPIRE connected with the development of related information infrastructures, in particular in the e-government context, the use of http URIs is considered prudent” - Implementation of Identifiers using URIs in INSPIRE – Frequently Asked Questions.

    The development of a common strategy, however, is more and more being identified as a crucial need.

    When re-using INSPIRE, the environmental reporting allows countries to use their own systems for the creation of national INSPIRE identifiers, with strong recommendation to keep consistency between the spatial objects identifiers in related datasets already published under INSPIRE obligations.    

    Hope this post is an opportunity to share experiences in the different Member States and maybe come up with a proposal for the development of a common strategy.


  • Katharina SCHLEIDT

    By Katharina SCHLEIDT

    Hi all,

    a note on resolvable identifiers - I did a document on this for Austro Control a few years ago, finally got the OK to publish it recently.

    The following document explains both the necessity and the implementation (with a bit of references towards implementation in GeoServer and Apache):

    If you want to see the services, go to



    PS: as an added goodie, there's also a first bang at an OGC API from the API4INSPIRE Project on the same data holdings for the curious

  • Martin TUCHYNA

    By Martin TUCHYNA

    Dear Stefania and Kathi,

    thanks a lot for your input, providing a lot of food for thought.

    In our case, aside the INSPIRE expectations for the Persistend identifiers (PIDs) , we shall (and want to) consider also PIDs requirements from the eGovernment legislation here in SK.

    So we are planning to discuss these aspects with the relevant colleagues in order to search for the synergies.

    With respect to the Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural source - The reporting consists of a text part, MS Excel files and GIS layers. These requirements are further specified in the guidelines for the preparation of the report on the implementation of Directive 91/676 / EEC on nitrates.
    Here is the tabular data in the Data Dictionary document on Evaluation of Water Quality under the Nitrates Directive in Chapter 3.9 Designated Nitrate Vulnerable Zones GIS boundaries table for the specified:

    3.9.13 INSPIRE ID request (ND_INSPIREID),

    Column definition:INSPIRE compliant ID

    Methodology: Universal identifier from Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE), used across EU databases. Please refer to the INSPIRE national contact points  ( points/57734) to generate the unique  INSPIRE IDs.


    Data specification: Datatype: string Minimum size: 0 Maximum size: 255



    Similarly, in the table, the MS Excel template for this dataset - version 2 (NiD.xls) contains the information in sheet “NVZBoundaries” in the column “ND_INSPIREID”.


    Based on these requirements, data providers shall insert under this attribute " inspireId " or "gml:identifier"?

    Refering this clarification, if inspireId shall be colled here, how it shall looks like, if we could pick up example:

    localId: SKZRAN508985


    In *.xls table ?

    For the spatial representation, we have found, that there migh be relevance for this upcoming reporting deadline with the INSPIRE priority dataset identified as Dataset no. 36,01 in the Rolling priority list of data sets v2.0.

    Here I suppose the gml encoding could looks like this one:

    <am:ManagementRestrictionOrRegulationZone gml:id="SKZRAN508985">
      <am:areaValue uom="m2">1000.0</cp:areaValue>
      <am:endLifespanVersion nilReason="unpopulated" xsi:nil="true">
          <base:versionId nilReason="unpopulated" xsi:nil="true">
    Thanks a lot, 
    Best wishes, 


  • Katharina SCHLEIDT

    By Katharina SCHLEIDT

    Hi Martin,

    your XML example looks good to me :)

    Identifiers in INSPIRE are confusing what with 3 identifiers being available (gml:id, gml:identifier, base:inspireId), with different constraints on each (especially tricky are the constraints on the gml:id, that does not allow provision of a URL), and different functionality provided for each (gml:id is easiest to query on WFS if no stored queries are foreseen).

    Thus I've also gone the way you sketch, starting with a localId and namespace, and creating concatenated URLs as you show. This way users can access whichever way they prefer, if you can also get the concatenated URLs resolvable (so that returns the XML shown) it would be perfect!

    Pertaining to reporting, once you've got the base features being reported on set up this way, it should be easy to provide reporting data with links (using one of the various options you've described). If you're providing an Excel or Shapefile with additional data, it only needs to contain either the URL or the localId and namespace for referencing.



    PS: there is one caveat pertaining to versioning, this may cause issues. But we've got to work step by step!

  • Stefania MORRONE

    By Stefania MORRONE

    Dear Martin

    the example you provided is a perfect example of how it should work:

    • InspireId.namespace in the form of http URIs
    • InspireId.localId = gml:id
    • gml:identifier = concatenation of InspireId.namespace and InspireId.localId (concatenated URL)

    In the reporting, the ND_INSPIREID field should be filled in with a concatenated string "InspireId.namespace + InspireId.localId" (in your example it will be as well the gml:identifier of the spatial object)

    All the best,