European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Group activity

  • General

    The INSPIRE Community Forum is now part of the INSPIRE helpdesk system, based on GitHub (, so please start there any new discussions.

    The current platform will remain available in read only mode in its current form and URL address until 31/01/2021, then its content will be archived and then published in a different URL which will be announced when it becomes available.

  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Lena Hallin-Pihlatie replied on the discussion topic Possible errors in LC xml schemas
    Dear Michael, Thanks for checking with us. They do look like errors/mistakes to me. However, I would recommend you to wait (if you can) for a confirmation from people involved in the preparation of the Land Cover Data Specification, as it is... view reply
  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Lena Hallin-Pihlatie added a new discussion topic Is the Land Cover Class code list to be used or not?
    Hi, I find that there is a need to sort out whether to use any classification or the Land Cover Class code list when implementing Inspire in the Land Cover theme. My interpretation is that the Land Cover Class code list should be used,...
    • Michael LUTZ

      Dear Julian,

      sorry to disagree here. If you read Annex H of the LC data specification, the possible usages of the PLCC code list are:

      a) It can be used simply as a kind of nomenclature, and the LC data is entered into the model by application of the code list like a categorization and attaching only one single code from the code list to a certain land cover unit.
      b) The code list can be used in a descriptive way, which gives room for attaching more than one land cover component from the code list to a single land cover unit, expressing that on a particular spot in landscape there exists more than one land cover component. This application of the code list would go in-line with the idea of the descriptive approach of the ISO standard 19144-2 (LCML).
      c) Use the code list like mentioned in b), in a more elaborated way by not only mentioning more than one land cover component to be attached to a certain land cover unit, but also to enter a percentage value and structure description (like in LCML horizontal pattern/vertical stratum), which indicates the relative fraction and spatial composition of the considered land cover component inside the area extent of a definite land cover unit.

      And when looking at the classes, there are clearly land cover classes (e.g. Broadleaved forest trees or Artificial constructions).

      So I fully support Lena's summary.

      On a related note, in the MIWP-6 sub-group on registers and registries, we are currently setting up a testbed for an INSPIRE register federation that will investigate how to best model and work with national and thematic extensions of central INSPIRE code list (empty or not). The LandCoverClassValue and its extensions (e.g. the recently published Corine land cover classification) will probably be one example we will look at.

    • Julián DELGADO

      By Julián DELGADO

      Dear Michael,

      Concepts of LC classes and LC descriptors go further than DS LC can express. Knowledge of it has evolved and matured in last years after DS LC, and go back to proposed PLCC can arise confusions. The PLCC where thought has atomic LC descriptors of the surface, but if you analyze each of them it is possible to identify some LC classes on it. So, the use of this list like LC class values, is not sufficient clear.

      PLCC really atomic LC descriptors: artificial constructions, consolidate bare surface, unconsolidated base surface, coniferous forest tress, broadleaved forest trees, shrubs, herbaceous plants, lichens/mosses, salt/brackish water, permanent snow/ice

      PLCC that represent a complex combination of atomic LC descriptors (real LC classes): arable land, permanent woody/shrubs crops, wetland/marshes, organic/chemical deposits, intertidal flats, water courses/bodies

      But even more important is that LC DS don't motivate to use an unique nomenclature of classes, answered in the annex H question 5. 


    • Pavel MILENOV

      Dear All,


      Although, I was not directly involved in the TWG on LC as a member, I will try to provide some further comments about the scope, nature and applicability of the pure PLCCs. These comments are based on my personal experience and understanding of the subject.


      To my knowledge the reason to propose such PLCC within INSPIRE was partly initiated by EUROSTAT in response to similar activities conducted by United Nation Statistical Division. SEEA has proposed a list of “aggregated structures” based on LCCS to be used to produce harmonized land cover statistics at global scale. They were meant to describe the land purely based on its bio-physical nature (land cover). During the global consultation of the land cover classification, EUROSTAT argued that apart of the FAO Land Cover Classification System (LCCS), Eurostat's work on LUCAS and the work carried out in the LC and LU working groups of INSPIRE should be taken into account. Thus, one of the aims of the Pure Land Cover Components (PLCCs) was to provide the concept and method to describe the European land purely based on land cover characteristics for the purpose of the EU statistics, taking into account not only the LCCS, but the European experience from LUCAS and INSPIRE development. Moreover, PLCCS have to act also as a sort of generalized nomenclature - similar to the SEEA one - which can be used as a generic INSPIRE LC codelist (or even enumeration) to which national LC nomenclatures and products will be mapped in order to derive harmonized statistics on land cover at European scale.  


      I was indirectly involved in the discussion about Annex G together with Wim Devos from JRC, who was member of the INSPIRE TWG on LC. We tried to design a stratification of the land, based on generic land cover “primitives”. The list of LC types was meant to be:  scale-independent; flat (all LC types are on the same level of detail); exhaustive and unambiguous (LC types are mutually exclusive). We used the UML model of the LCML, combined with the dichotomous approach of the LCCS, by starting this list from the most generic (upper) level of the model with only two main land cover types (biotic/abiotic) and further sub-dividing them by adding land cover classifiers (elements) while going step-wise at lower (more detailed) hierarchical level of the LMCL model. The process was not always straightforward as LCML concept is different than the one applied in the LCCS. I believe part of all this work was used for the design of the PLCCs currently present in Annex G; although the resulted list in the INSPIRE DS is quite different than what we have proposed.


      In this respect, I can agree with Michael, that the current PLCC list looks both:

      1. as fixed nomenclature to be applied a one single code for every land cover unit, and
      2. as a set of LC “primitives” used to describe the different land cover components inside the land cover unit, in similar way as SIOSE.


      However, I agree also with Julian, that adopting the PLCC as official INSPIRE codelist is not advisable, as knowledge on land cover semantics already evolved and matured, and there are new developments in this respect (EAGLE project, TEGON model) that needs to be considered before such decision is taken.


      best regards,


  • Christian ANSORGE
    Christian ANSORGE added a new discussion topic Codelist for Corine Land Cover (CLC) published
    Dear colleagues,   I am pleased to inform you that we have now published the CLC nomenclature codelist in a referencable format.  Please have a look at the EEA Data...
    • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

      By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie


      Is there or will there be support for other languages in the CLC code list? That is, can we refer to it 1) only by using class labels in English or 2) also by using class labels in for example Finnish?



    • Christian ANSORGE

      By Christian ANSORGE

      Hej Lena,

      I am sorry but we will not provide the CLC codelist multilingual, also because EIONET Data Dictionary isn't supporting multilingual versions of code lists. 

      The notation and therefore the URI of the values is intentionally chosen to be language neutral. Therefore the codes can be used independent from the actual language and only the labels are in English.

      Best regards


    • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

      By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

      Hi Christian, Michael, all,

      Have you already discussed and reached an agreement on how to handle the CLC code list in general in INSPIRE in the MIWP-6 sub-group on registers and registries or elsewhere?

      According to Michael the CLC code list  published by EEA should:

      If possible, it would be good to put this issue in place together with the exlusion of references to the old CorineValue code list in the TG on LC as proposed here. That is in case this proposal is endorsed by the MIG.

      Best regards,



  • Michael LUTZ
    Michael LUTZ added a new discussion topic Possible errors in LC xml schemas
    Dear LC experts, when working on the update of the Annex I xml schemas (MIWP-18a), where the MS agreed we should publish backwards-incompatible new versions of all the schemas (also for Annex II+III themes), I came across a number of possible...
  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Many thanks Julian for your very valuable contribution. There is a thread in the Land Cover sub-group regarding transformation too. Check this out and join the Land Cover sub-group if you have not already done... view reply
  • Kenneth BRAGG
    Hi Julián  I will definitely be there in Madrid next week. Looking forward to seeing your presentation! Ken view reply
  • Julián DELGADO
    Dear Lena, all I share with you our experience from IGN Spain about transformation into INSPRIE application schemas of LC, LU and OI using FME 2015. FME is a flexible tool for managing geo-data, and we tested that it could be used for many... view reply
  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO uploaded the file Example of national ELU transformation GFS
    Example of national ELU transformation GFS
  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO uploaded the file Example of national ELU transformation GML
    Example of national ELU transformation GML
  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO uploaded the file Example of national LC transformation GFS
    Example of national LC transformation GFS
  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO uploaded the file Example of national LC tranformation GML
    Example of national LC tranformation GML
  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO uploaded the file INSPIRE transformation LC LU OI using FME
    INSPIRE transformation LC LU OI using FME
  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Hi, Please use this discussion topic to share software experiences related to transforming national data sets into INSPIRE Land Cover and Land Use application schemas. Feel free to link to relevant presentations/test...
  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Lena Hallin-Pihlatie added a new discussion topic Raster encoding
    According to the data specifications of the INSPIRE themes Land Cover and Land Use, raster data shall be encoded in GML - completely or partially. If you or your organisation have implemented or is currently working in the implementation of such...
  • James PASSMORE
    James PASSMORE replied on the discussion topic What makes INSPIRE difficult - Top 10
    There appears to be no way to deal with (map) scale in any of the Annex II data specifications. view reply
  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO added a new discussion topic Datasets from MS to be supplied according INSPIRE
    Dear all, an organizational question arises to me… Now much of us we are working in the transformation of our LC/LU datasets into INSPIRE specifications, but how many datasets per Member State are you thinking interested to be supplied...
    • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

      By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

      Hi Julian,

      Sorry for my reply.

      In Finland we have made one implementation plan per INSPIRE theme, that is one for Land Cover and another one for Land Use. The one for Land Cover, published in May 2014, can be found here (it's in Finnish though..). All relevant data providers were involved in setting up the plan with secretarial support from the Finnish INSPIRE Contact Point.

      We have identified several datasets and data providers in the LC theme:

      Dataset, Data provider:

      Land Parcel Identifiction System (LPIS), Agency for Rural Affairs (MAVI)
      Forest Inventory data, Natural Resouces Institute (LUKE)
      Corine Land Cover 2000, 2006 and 2012 datasets, Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE
      Topographic map database, National Land Survey of Finland (MML)

      Since the national  datasets are different,they are produced for different purpuses and contain different geometries and attribuuts, which are not interoperable, it was agreed NOT to produce a joint INSPIRE data product and service, but separate ones, at least in the first round.  It was agreed that each organisation is responsible for its own INSPIRE data products and services (metadata, view, download) and the creation of needed code lists. All identified datasets cover the whole country, so the present plan does not include regional datasets.

      I hope I've ansered your questions. Better late than never ;)



    • Julián DELGADO

      By Julián DELGADO

      Hi Lena,

      I partially replaied right know in LU cluster in this link:

      But I can explain here the main issues related with LC. Documentation about CODIIGE and LISIGE law that I previously mentioned are available here (in Spanish)

      About LC dataset available for INSPIRE transformation we identified tens, coming from national or regional levels. Maybe the most characteristic ones are CORINE Land Cover, National LC/LU System (SIOSE), Land Parcel Information LPIS (SIGPAC), National Forest Map/Inventory (MFE/IFN), Nature Databank (BDN), and others really appreciated systems from regions.

      For the moment, and after INSPIRE head chiefs recommendations in 2016, to cover the national territory with at least one data set to provide answers for European environmental actions, we decided to prioritize the work and effort in current and next months. During 2016 we are transforming and publishing SIOSE (national coverage 1:25.000) for LC and Existing LU INSPIRE needs. In 2017 we have to puss actions for rest of national and information systems.

      About technical issues:

      • For LC we have reached a consensus to define a common nomenclature of classes to code all Spanish datasets. With the objective to publish all Spanish LC data harmonized with the same classes. This nomenclature is really easy with few classes and relatable with CLC. Additionally, those data providers interested to add also original classes can do it because INSPIRE specifications allow it. We have made public the nomenclature in a online register, now integrated in the JRC as test versión

      My best regards


  • Julián DELGADO
    Julián DELGADO replied on the discussion topic Sharing experiences from data transformations within the Land Cover theme
    Dear Lena I consider very interesting your example of transformation using FME and ESRI databases. From our experience in IGN Spain we have worked with FME as well, because offers broad possibilities for transformation and formats, included... view reply
  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Lena Hallin-Pihlatie replied on the discussion topic Layer naming in web services with different kinds of LC layers
    I would like to draw your attention to an interesting discussion on a similar topic (layer naming) in the Earth Sciences cluster (Geology theme): view reply
  • Giacomo MARTIRANO
    Giacomo MARTIRANO added a new discussion topic On line validation of datasets
    In the context of the European project eENVplus (the "project hosted in Italy" mentioned by Peter) we developed a Validation Service consisting of an implementation for the ATS (Abstract Test Suite) included in the Annex A of...
  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie
    Hi, Here's a report on our data transformation and software experiences so far. We have used FME and the Esri LC database template mentioned above. The work was partly funded by the LifeData project. view reply
Land Cover & Use

Land Cover & Use

Join this group to share your knowledge, learn and collaborate in solving issues related to the Land Cover and Land Use themes