European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

First WFS 2.0 compliant service: Romanian Protected Sites

Because almost no compliant implementation exist yet, we thought that is relevant to share the information about the first INSPIRE WFS 2.0 compliant service based on harmonised data. In order to understand what we need to deliver, we spent a lot of time to identify one valid WFS implementation and we were surprised to find none. So we did one.

Even if the service was online from the end of 2015, in mid June 2016 the Geoportal validator was upgraded so we were surprised to see that there are only three download services that have no issues at all according to the current validator. There are two ATOM implementation and one WFS.

You may find the download services that are passing the EC tests at http://inspire-geoportal.ec.europa.eu/proxybrowser/ by selecting "download" under "Spatial Data Service Type" category and then the radio button "with no issue at all".

If you want only the WFS and no ATOM, you may select WFS 2.0 under "Network Service Implementation Specification" category.

The WFS 2.0 service is passing as well the data validation that is currently not implemented within the EC Geoportal. This can be tested at http://cloud.epsilon-italia.it/eenvplus_new/

Any comments are welcomed.

 

 

  • Martin TUCHYNA

    By Martin TUCHYNA

    Some more interesting details (e.g. about comparison of various ETL tools), available also in this presentation of Teamnet: https://www.yammer.com/danuberdsi/#/files/61425483

     

     

  • Iurie MAXIM

    Hello everybody,

    If it is not clear how to get to that service, here, at http://inspire.biodiversity.ro/WFS/RO_ENV_PS/wfs?service=WFS&version=2.0.0&request=GetCapabilities it can be accessed the GetCapabilities document.

    All ps:ProtectedSite features can be retrieved by http://inspire.biodiversity.ro/WFS/RO_ENV_PS/wfs?service=WFS&version=2.0.0&request=GetFeature&typename=ps:ProtectedSite (it is very big).

    The first 2 features can be retrieved by using the "count=2" in the request http://inspire.biodiversity.ro/WFS/RO_ENV_PS/wfs?service=WFS&version=2.0.0&request=GetFeature&typename=ps:ProtectedSite&count=2 Of course that more features can be retrieved if writing a bigger number.

    There are many other KVP requests that can be used, I will present them in a future post.

    Best regards,

    Iurie Maxim

     

     

     

     

  • Stefania MORRONE

    By Stefania MORRONE

    Thank you, Iurie for providing the links.

    I tested the http://inspire.biodiversity.ro/WFS/RO_ENV_PS/wfs?service=WFS&version=2.0.0&request=GetFeature&typename=ps:ProtectedSite&count=2 with the eENVplus Validation Service and the served features fail validation because of the missing legalFoundationDocument elements in WFS response.

    I had to face the same problem setting up WFS for CDDA using deegree (to solve the issue, I  had to edit the SQLFeatureStore configuration file - the one automatically created by deegree  - and add the encoding for the legalFoundationdocument element ).

    So it seems that GoPublisher suffers from the same issue. Can you make a check?

    BR

    Stefania

     

     

       

  • Stefania MORRONE

    By Stefania MORRONE

    I guess in GoPublisher the issue is a different one. I downloaded more features (count=10) and I found out that in some of the features the legalFoundation element is correctly present and in some others is not. So I presume that GoPublisher includes the element only when it is not empty ... 

    It would be very interesting to know if this is the case ..

  • Iurie MAXIM

    Hi Stephania,

    Indeed for RORMS0010 feature that is retrieved while making this request 

    https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/discussion/view/84713/first-wfs-20-compliant-service-romanian-protected-sites there is no LegalFoundationDocument in the database because this is a Ramsar site for which the act of the establishment trough the Ramsar Convention is not known. Only for few international designations the LegalFoundationDocuments are missing.

    There are few issues that need to be fixed as we switched from XSD version 3.0 to XSD version 4.0 and now for voidable elements the nilreason must be provided as can be seen for example trough this request where for versionId is provided nil reason :

    http://inspire.biodiversity.ro/WFS/RO_ENV_PADS/wfs?service=WFS&version=2.0.0&request=GetFeature&typename=br:Bio-geographicalRegion&propertyname=//inspireId

    Go Publisher is not including the element if in the database it has NULL as value. It is including the element if the value in the database is an empty string. See https://wiki.snowflakesoftware.com/display/GPCTD/Handling+Null+values+with+CustomSQL+NilReason+Attribute

    Best regards,

    Iurie Maxim

     

  • Iurie MAXIM

    Hello everybody,

    To better understand the validations made by EC Geoportal, if going to http://inspire-geoportal.ec.europa.eu/proxybrowser/ will see that today 17 September, there are 299593 resources indexed in the EC Geoportal, as it can be seen in the image below:

    If instead of leaving the radio button an the "All resources" option, it will be selected the radio button "with no issues at all", there will be only 3680 resources that have no issues. So from the total number of resources in the EC Geoportal only 1,2% have no issues, as it can be seen in the image below:

    If the "Geoportal Type Resources" is expanded it can be seen that most are datasets with no issues at all (2429 datasets, it is actualy refering to Metadata of the Datasets and not to the dataset itself). There are only 196 services that have no issues at all as it can be seen in the image bellow:

    The 196 services with no issues represent only 0.3 % from the total of 58945 services that are indexed in the EC Geoportal.

    If the "Spatial data service type" is expanded in the ”Selection Criteria”, then it can be seen that from those 196 services with no issues at all, the majority are the discovery services (75), followed by view services (61), other services (55) and by download services at the end: Only 6 download services with no issues at all, as it can be seen in the image bellow:

    If clicking on "download (6)" there will be listed 6 download services that have no issues at all, namely 4 from Austria and two from Romania as it can be seen in the image bellow:

    The 6 download services with no issues represent only 0.03 % from the total of 21167 download services that are indexed in the EC Geoportal.

    If the "Network Service Implementation Specification" is expanded in the ”Selection Criteria”, then it can be seen that from those 6 download services, two are ATOM and one is WFS 2.0 as it can be seen in the image below:

    It can be seen that the 6 download services are doubled and are actualy 3 download services. We do not understand exactly why the services are doubled and what are the other three services that are displayed. At least we did only one such download service and not two. We interpret this as beeing a bug in the EC Proxy Browser. It seems that for each download service, the EC Proxy Browser is considering that service as beeing both a "downloadservicedataset" and a "service - download" so it is counting it twice. 

    If clicking on iso 19142/wfs 2.0(1) link then it will be clear that out of those 3 download services, the two from Austria are ATOM and the one from Romania is WFS 2.0 as it can be seen in the image below:

    Currently it seems that the EC Validator is not verifying if the dataset comply with XSD schemas and Data Specifications, but is verifying only that the dataset can be downloaded. Therefore the content verification needd to be made with other tools curently, such as for example the ENVPlus validator, but that works only for few data themes and that cant check a large dataset and is not able to verify a dataset that contains features from multiple data themes (XSDs).

    Thats why the two ATOM services from Austria are passing the tests even if the data served by those services is not conformant with data specification at all.

    The Romanian Protected Areas WFS 2.0 service was made at the beging based on XSD version 3.0 schemas and at that time it passed all the validations in the ENV Plus validator http://cloud.epsilon-italia.it/eenvplus_new/. As we switched to XSD schemas 4.0 in order to be able to include in the dataset feature types from AU and BR as well, there appeared some errors related to voidable fields for which in XSD version 4.0 schema now it is necessary to provide the nil reason (in XSD 3.0 it was not necessary).

    Now we hope that we provided all those nil reasons to make the service fully compliant again. Currently is passing the ENVPlus validations again. We see actualy that except this service there is no other compliant download service, nor WFS, nor ATOM. Any comments are welcomed.

    @Stephania: If yesterday you observed that the ENVPlus validator crashed, it was because we tried to validate 500 features out of the total of more than 6000 features that curently exist in the dataset (it has more than 500 MB in GML 3.2 format)

    Iurie

  • Stefania MORRONE

    By Stefania MORRONE

    Hi Iurie,

    a few clarifications about the validation process performed by the eENVplus Validation Service.

    Every dataset, no matter the data theme it belongs to or the number of referenced application schemas, is subject to  

    • Schema validation  i.e. it is validated against the requirements contained in each of the addressed XSDs (therefore a dataset that contains features from multiple data themes is validated against the requirements of all the relevant XSDs)
    • GML 3.2.1 validation  i.e. it is validated against requirements of the ISO 19136:2007 which defines the GML standard. Not just the gml.xsd schema requirements are addressed, but also requirements which are not expressible by means of XML grammar and therefore not encodable in the XSD. Such tests are performed by means of a GML schematron as well as relevant TestNG test methods.

    The validation of  INSPIRE 'theme - specific ' requirements which are not expressible by means of XML grammar and therefore not encodable in the XSD  - e.g. the code list requirements - is currently available only for Protected Sites and Land Cover data themes, and it is performed only when the user selects relevant schematron from drop down list.

    Regarding the file size, currently only files up to about 100 MB (the size is depending on the structure of the addressed schemas) can be validated, due to a limitation in the OGC GML test Suite, which underpins the eENVplus VS. After having discussed about this with OGC CITE team, a new release has been developed to overcome such a limitation- indeed an important one in the INSPIRE context - still beta version, anyway, and tests ongoing.

    BR

    Stefania

  • Iurie MAXIM

    Hi Stephania,

    Thank you for the clarifications regarding EnvPlus validator. In order to keep this discution inline with the subject I replied here https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/discussion/view/20217/on-line-validation-of-datasets.

    Iurie

  • Iurie MAXIM

    Hello everybody,

    Today (20 September 2016) we observed that 16 ATOM services from Cyprus are now passing the EC Geoportal validations. Yesterday they were not there. Currently there are 18 ATOM (16 from CY and 2 from AT) and 1 WFS from RO with no issues at all according to the EC validator.

    Cyprus made ATOM download services for:

    - Atmosferic Conditions,
    - Bio-geographical Regions,
    - Population Distribution,
    - Utility and Governamental Services,
    - Area Management/Restriction/Regulation Zones and Reporting Units,
    - Elevation,
    - Mineral Resources,
    - Environmental monitoring facilities,
    - Production and Industrial Facilities,
    - Sea regions,
    - Land Use,
    - Statistical Units,
    - Natural risk zones,
    - Species distribution,
    - Buildings (2 datasets)

    Even if the features have many fields filled with nil reason, those that we opened till now seems to be valid.

    The GMLs were made with ArcGIS for INSPIRE. We are curious to see if nested elements were encoded or not.

    Best regards,

    Iurie Maxim

  • Iurie MAXIM

    Hello everybody,

    Yesterday 26.09.2016 Cyprus published a WFS that is passing the EC validator for the Administrative Units.

    You may see the service at http://inspire-geoportal.ec.europa.eu/proxybrowser/ if following the steps described in the post from 17 Sept.

    Even if the service is not passing currently the OGC GML 3.2 validator, the nested elements such as lower and upper level administrative units were encoded.

    Great job Cyprus !

    Even if the service seems to be slow, it seems that ArcGIS for INSPIRE made some important steps forward for serving compliant WFS download services.

    Maybe Cyprus can provide some information about their experience with ArcGIS for INSPIRE.

    It must be noted that currently the WFS that are passing the EC validator are made with proprietary software auch as Snowflake Go Publisher WFS and ArcGIS for INSPIRE.

    Best regards,

    Iurie Maxim

This discussion is closed.

This discussion is closed and is not accepting new comments.

Biodiversity & Area Management

Biodiversity & Area Management

If themes like Protected Sites, Area Management/Restriction/Regulation Zones and Reporting Units, Habitats and Biotopes, Species Distribution, Bio-geographical Regions matters to you, join these groups!