European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Mineral Resources application schema inconsistencies or?


-          WRONG (tendentious) Feature (Class) name (the same applies to portrayal FeatureType Class EarthResourceView)!!! If we're considering/modelling MineralResources domain, its name should be the same. EarthResource is too much broader term - concept and includes inorganic fluid, agronomic, forestry…not only metallic, non-metallic and fossilised organic resource modelled in current schema. I don’t see any semantic nor practical reason for this appointment.


-          Duplicated attributes: name and mineName.

-          In INSPIRE schema geologic unit as well as geologic material are not anywhere associated with mineral resource (!). In EarthResourceML schema geologic material directly associated (composite aggregation) with mineral resource but not with geologic unit while in EarthResourceView the hostGeologicUnit attribute requires (!?!).  

EarthResourcePortrayal:: MineActivityView/MineView

-          In mineActivityView attribute observationMethod, seems to me, doesn’t make any sense, because activity in this context is, in the same time, observation.

Displaying Mine and activity (mineActivityView) within is possible only as separated layers (especially in small scale). Why not make Union of these attributes in MineView? Base question actually is which one of these three Portrayal classes (FeatureType) use for delivering and displaying mineral occurrences and deposits? Geometrically it overlapping (?).

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