European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

INSPIRE SOIL Theme: change of the multiplicity of the soilDerivedObjectObservation

Karen Fullerton
By Karen Fullerton Replies (3)

I’m sharing with you the implementation issue reported to us by Tomas Lindberg from the Geological Survey of Sweden related to the SOIL data specification and more precisely:
 
To change the  association soilDerivedObjectObservation between SoilDerivedObject and OM_Observation from 1 to 0..* to allow multiple observations on a soilDerivedObject.
 
Reference: Figure 11: UML class diagram of the SOIL relation with O&M classes, and resulting xsd schema
 
Case: We are using soilDerivedObject to deliver results from geochemical analysis, and the model seems to work fine for this purpose apart from the multiplicity issue described above. We are forced to create a soilDerivedObject for every observation just to add the same geometry for every observed property (we have about 30 elements analysed at the same location), otherwise the schema validation fails. The resulting GML is not efficient and makes it difficult to use in a GIS, where the map is clotted with points at the same location and drawing speed is poor.
 
We don´t see the point of the restriction to 1, and it is not consistent with the association soilProfileObservation that is  0..*, or the general O&M Extensions to INSPIRE that have a 0..* association between feature of interest and OM_Observation (D2.9 O&M Guidelines Figure 4 Observation Package). We therefore request a change to the model, or in the short term a confirmation if our issue is accepted or if it modeled this way by intention. (by Tomas Lindberg)
 

  • Einar EBERHARDT

    By Einar EBERHARDT

    The suggestion seems reasonable, a change of the data specification would be helpful.

  • Amelia BAPTIE

    Following the discussion above this proposed change to the data specification has been added to the MIG-T corrigenda for approval or otherwise in December 2015,

    https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/issues/2209

    If you have any comments to add before this is put forward please add them here before the 20th of October.

  • Amelia BAPTIE

    Dear all,

    The change of the ‘association soilDerivedObjectObservation between SoilDerivedObject and OM_Observation from 1 to 0..*’ within the Soil UML diagram (figure 11 in the Soil Data Specifications) was discussed at the recent thematic cluster facilitators meeting in Rome and will be put forward for approval to the MIG-T shortly.

    (Please note the original request was to change the association from 1 to 0..*, however following further discussion it was agreed that the request should to change 1 to 1..* to ensure that if you provide a (or several) SoilDerivedObject(s), then a value is attached to it.)

    So it is proposed that we put forward the following change to the MIG-T,

    To change the association soilDerivedObjectObservation between SoilDerivedObject and OM_Observation from 1 to 1..*

    This change would allow multiple observations on a soilDerivedObject

    We don’t believe this change would have an impact on current implementations of the data model as current implementations will still be valid. However, we are looking for feedback from the community to confirm this prior to submission of this change to the MIG-T.

    Please can you post your comments here as to whether this change would or would not affect your implementation of the soil data specification?

    Thank you.

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