European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Group activity

  • Michael LUTZ
    Michael LUTZ replied on the discussion topic missing associations to OM_Observation in xsd
    Dear Johanna, sorry for taking so long to respond. You can find an updated version (4.0.1) of the schema for testing attached and also online under https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/draft-schemas/so/4.0/Soil.xsd. Please check whether this... view reply
  • Michael LUTZ
    Michael LUTZ uploaded the file Soil XML schema v4.0.1
    Bugfix version of the Soil XML schema, including 4 missing optional properties referring to related OM_Observation objects.
  • Enrico Iredi
    Enrico Iredi replied on the discussion topic Natural Risk Zones - Definition "Risk Zone"
    Hello Johanna, although I have no knowledge of this topic. But when I think back to landscape planning. On the one hand there is a layer with usable areas (for example field, residential area, industrial area) and on the other hand a layer with... view reply
  • Miguel LLORENTE ISIDRO
    Miguel LLORENTE ISIDRO replied on the discussion topic Natural Risk Zones - Definition "Risk Zone"
    EE would show the distribution of "value" (an abstraction of wealth, services, insured-value, whatever) and an assessment of vulnerability (fragility of something against a given hazard) whereas RZ would show the distribution of damage... view reply
  • Katharina Lupp
    Katharina Lupp replied on the discussion topic Natural Risk Zones - Definition "Risk Zone"
    Thanks for your response. I still don´t understand the difference between a Risk Zone and an Exposed Element, if the geometry is the same as the Exposed Element geometry. I thought that a Risk Zone is the sum of the Exposed Elements in one... view reply
  • Miguel LLORENTE ISIDRO
    Miguel LLORENTE ISIDRO replied on the discussion topic Natural Risk Zones - Definition "Risk Zone"
    The stoichiometry of the subject makes Risk a unique (meaning "single") concept of its own; a number with units (qualitative or quantitative), hence multi-polygon does not appropriately address the issue (although it might suit the method... view reply
  • Katharina Lupp
    Katharina Lupp added a new discussion topic Natural Risk Zones - Definition "Risk Zone"
    Dear all, I am experiencing some trouble with the data specification of “Natural Risk Zones”. How are the "Risk Zones" defined? If the Hazard Area expresses the area, where the hazard occurs but does not necessarily cause...
    • Katharina Lupp

      By Katharina Lupp

      Thanks for your response.
      I still don´t understand the difference between a Risk Zone and an Exposed Element, if the geometry is the same as the Exposed Element geometry. I thought that a Risk Zone is the sum of the Exposed Elements in one Hazard Area, thus Multi Polygon --> means all Exposed Elements in one Risk Zone. If we model all Exposed Elemets as seperate object (polygon), there´d be no additional value in the Risk Zone (no difference in the geometry). Therefore we would have the same amount of Exposed Elements as Risk Zones.

      You have said, that the unique meaning implies the LevelOrIntensity. But in the Data Model the information is also given by the feature type Exposed Elements --> attribute: Vulnerability Assessment --> LevelOrIntensity

      So what is the additional information for the user, if he looks for the Risk Zone?

    • Miguel LLORENTE ISIDRO

      By Miguel LLORENTE ISIDRO

      EE would show the distribution of "value" (an abstraction of wealth, services, insured-value, whatever) and an assessment of vulnerability (fragility of something against a given hazard) whereas RZ would show the distribution of damage after a given hazard.

      RZ is not a sum of coverages or attributes within equal geometries, RZ is the result of an analysis (very likely non linear, very likely showing a threshold-like behaviour, always positive and with upper limit; hence complex) describing the interaction of hazard forces (physical, chemical or other) with the properties of objects (wood, steel, whatever), ultimately providing the cost of returning "the object" to "normal" conditions or the cost of compensation, or other sources of expenses (called generically  "damage"). EE can be actual objects (things you can touch, e.g. a bridge) or not (e.g. urban planning); fixed in space and time (buildings) or not (cars, people). Risk zone can never be touched or measured in real world because it is the output of an assessment.

      In order to provide a RZ there must exist at least one EE. This is a sort of double check to guarantee Risk as defined within INSPIRE is interoperable, given there are many interpretations out there of what is risk and what units should risk have. The equation must be balanced as in stoichiometry. Moreover, value of objects is likely dependant on the objective of the risk analysis, therefore, EE provides a background in order to appropriately understand risk beyond its units (context based). Eg. value of an EE could be linked to "total insured value" (not insured = value 0), hence risk would be suitable for insurers but not for spatial planners. Value of an EE could be "number of people", interesting for policy makers (just to mention one potential user) but it is likely not very meaningful for insurers, given the number of people is not a very good proxy to understand if they would be interested in getting insured.

       

    • Enrico Iredi

      Hello Johanna,

      although I have no knowledge of this topic. But when I think back to landscape planning. On the one hand there is a layer with usable areas (for example field, residential area, industrial area) and on the other hand a layer with HW100 areas. If you merge the two layers then you get n polygons, e.g. with the type of use residential area, which are located in the HW100 area. That should be the risk zones (= GM_Surface)?

  • László SŐRÉS
    László SŐRÉS replied on the discussion topic Data specification suitability - Deformation data from InSAR and GPS
    Dear Elena, A straightforward way of linking observation data to spatial features is using the SamplingFeature schema. It is also the recommendation of the INSPIRE Cross Thematic Working Group on Observations & Measurements. Hazard/Risk maps... view reply
  • Stefania MORRONE
    Stefania MORRONE replied on the discussion topic void value
    In order to better understand the encoding for nilReason attribute, I find it useful to refer the relevant validation check in the ETF validator (already posted by... view reply
  • Enrico Iredi
    Enrico Iredi replied on the discussion topic void value
    I don't understand you. Can you post the xml tag? view reply
  • Elena GONZALEZ
    Elena GONZALEZ added a new discussion topic Data specification suitability - Deformation data from InSAR and GPS
    Dear members of Earth Science Cluster, This is my first approach to INSPIRE Directive and also the first time I take part in this forum. I hope I'm making a proper use of it. Within an European Project I have generated deformation maps...
    • László SŐRÉS

      By László SŐRÉS

      Dear Elena,

      A straightforward way of linking observation data to spatial features is using the SamplingFeature schema. It is also the recommendation of the INSPIRE Cross Thematic Working Group on Observations & Measurements.
      Hazard/Risk maps encoded as NZ HazardCoverage and RiskCoverage can be referenced as sampledFeature from SamplingFeatures containing observation meatadata and deformation maps.
      May be, having an example it would be possible to be more specific.

      Best regards,
      Laszlo Sores

       

  • Marc VAN LIEDEKERKE
    Marc VAN LIEDEKERKE replied on the discussion topic WRB soil type classification
    Hi Jiri, in the data specs for soil is written: << Note that the WRBSoilName is of type WRBSoilNameType that allows to give WRBSoilName a value according to the WRB structure defined for the WRB2006 update 2007 or later... view reply
  • Jiri Brazda
    Jiri Brazda added a new discussion topic WRB soil type classification
    Hello everybody, We would like to convert our soil type classification into WRB and then use it in INSPIRE.  According to INSPIRE, the object WRB Soil Name Type is defined as "an identification of the soil profile according to ...
    • Marc VAN LIEDEKERKE

      By Marc VAN LIEDEKERKE

      Hi Jiri,

      in the data specs for soil is written:
      <<
      Note that the WRBSoilName is of type WRBSoilNameType that allows to give WRBSoilName a value according to the WRB structure defined for the WRB2006 update 2007 or later versions. The reference to the WRB version which is actually used is encoded through the values taken from the WRB related codelists (WRBReferenceSoilGroupValue, WRBQualifierValue, WRBSpecifierValue and
      WRBQualifierPlaceValue). If a SoilProfile is to be characterized by earlier versions of WRB (e.g. 1998), the other SoilName attribute should be used.
      >>

      So it is safe to use the newer version of 2014, but is should be documented at least in the metadata. Also the INSPIRE registries should be adapted to include the new version, and maybe even the system how to construct the full name. (I have not gone into such detail yet)

    • Linton Donovan

      By Linton Donovan

      Hi Marc,

      If it is actually possible to use WRB 2014 as you mentioned, than the registry of WRBReferenceSoilGroupValue should change. Which is logical of course.
      However this codelist is not extensible. How can we use the newer WRB version and get the data validated?

      Linton

    • Katharina SCHLEIDT

      By Katharina SCHLEIDT

      To my view, this is a two-fold issue:

      1. Lack of content in many of the non-extensible codelists provided via the INSPIRE Registry. To my understanding, this is an oversight that must be remedied, the concepts described in the World reference base for soil resources 2006 documentation must be formalized as codelist entries for referencing from the data provided.
      2. No governance process foreseen to encompass changes coming from external sources such as the WRB 2014 update mentioned. This issue is trickier, as the IRs as the underlying legal framework explicitly states WRB2006 update 2007 as the only legal source of values; a legal update will be required in order to legally update the codelists.

      To my understanding, the only way to force action on these points is either via the MS MIG representatives or through concerted action within a thematic community (i.e. NRC Soil)

  • Beatriz Caro Gadea
    Beatriz Caro Gadea replied on the discussion topic void value
    Thanks! but that value, in this case "unknown" , shall it be specify in the same table where the value is missing or in a new table??  Thank you and nice day!! view reply
  • Stefania MORRONE
    Stefania MORRONE replied on the discussion topic void value
    Dear Beatriz and Enrico, void reason values should be specified using the relevant INSPIRE 'Void reason Value' code list in the INSPIRE code list register. For example, if you want to specify that the value is 'unknown', you... view reply
  • Enrico Iredi
    Enrico Iredi replied on the discussion topic void value
    Hello Beatriz, that depends on the xsd. For example, beginLifespanVersion is expected <er-v:beginLifespanVersion nilReason="other:unpopulated" xsi:nil="true"/>. In contrast, endLifespanVersion is not expected. This... view reply
  • Beatriz Caro Gadea
    Beatriz Caro Gadea added a new discussion topic void value
    Hi all! shall I have to write the reason of a void value? is it obligatory? in that case does anyone know how to do it? maybe just to write it in the place of a void value?   thank you
  • Lorena HERNANDEZ QUIROS
    Dear Lucie,  an issue to include the missing values has been posted within the 'MIG' s Central INSPIRE registers and register federation space'. You can follow the approval and implementation process at :... view reply
  • Lucie KONDROVA
    Dear all, is the WRB Reference Soil Group codelist available somewhere as terms with URIs to be used in the INSPIRE data? I've only found this entry in the INSPIRE registry: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/codelist/WRBReferenceSoilGroupValue but... view reply
  • Lola Boquera
    Lola Boquera replied on the discussion topic Best practices for multiple lithologies in one polygon?
    Hello, I think that in the UML Geological Model you have the dataType "CompositionPart" and his multiplicity is 1 or more for each GeologicUnit. I mean you can have as many CompositionParts (material, role and proportion) as... view reply
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