European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Group activity

    • Christoph Wohner
      Christoph Wohner replied on the discussion topic Data Specification on Environmental Monitoring Facilities
      Thank you. I was looking at some implementation examples which had it omitted so I was little irritated. view reply
      • Katharina SCHLEIDT
        Katharina SCHLEIDT replied on the discussion topic Data Specification on Environmental Monitoring Facilities
        Hi Christoph, it is in the MD format for all INSPIRE Themes, also in the EF Spec. In Table 4 – Metadata for spatial datasets and spatial dataset series specified in Regulation 1205/2008/EC under 8.1 Metadata elements defined in INSPIRE... view reply
        • Christoph Wohner
          Christoph Wohner added a new discussion topic Data Specification on Environmental Monitoring Facilities
          Hi, when I went through the data specification for Environmental Monitoring Facilites, I noticed that there is no field that defines the language of the metarecord. It is mentioned that language information should be included in metadata for...
            • Katharina SCHLEIDT

              By Katharina SCHLEIDT

              Hi Christoph,

              it is in the MD format for all INSPIRE Themes, also in the EF Spec.

              In Table 4 – Metadata for spatial datasets and spatial dataset series specified in Regulation 1205/2008/EC under 8.1 Metadata elements defined in INSPIRE Metadata Regulation, you will find mention of both Resource language and Metadata language.

              In addition, you will find the following note (we didn't rewrite the MD guidelines per theme, just provided theme specific recommentations in the dataspec):

              Generic guidelines for implementing these elements using ISO 19115 and 19119 are available at http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/index.cfm/pageid/101. The following sections describe additional theme-specific recommendations and requirements for implementing these elements.

              Hope this helps!

               

              • Christoph Wohner

                By Christoph Wohner

                Thank you.

                I was looking at some implementation examples which had it omitted so I was little irritated.

            • Katharina SCHLEIDT published a news post SensorThings API Good Practice
              Join us in bringing OGC SensorThings API into INSPIRE!
              • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                Katharina SCHLEIDT replied on the discussion topic EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility hasObservation Attribute
                Hi Florian, to return the complement - thanks for asking real questions here! To my experience too many folks are scared of asking; as you have shown, many of these questions are very relevant and have not been clarified in a satisfactory manner,... view reply
                • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                  Katharina SCHLEIDT uploaded the file EF Classes with derived attributes and associations
                  A reworked UML diagram showing all EF Classes together with their derived attributes and associations
                  • Florian Hoedt
                    Florian Hoedt replied on the discussion topic EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility hasObservation Attribute
                    Hi Kathi First things first: Thank you for your great feedback by pointing me to the Dx.x paragraphs ironing out some of my concerns. It is a pleasure to dive deep into this and more and more painting an inspiring picture. Also, one of the... view reply
                    • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                      Katharina SCHLEIDT replied on the discussion topic EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility hasObservation Attribute
                      Hi Florian, a few bits: On your datamodel diagram - be aware of the fact that you're only displaying attributes from the final derivation level (so only the attributes specified for EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility, but none of those... view reply
                      • Florian Hoedt
                        Florian Hoedt added a new discussion topic EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility hasObservation Attribute
                        Hello together, According to the EnvironmentalMonitoringFacilities.xsd an EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility (EMF) hosts a list (0..n) of OM_Observation objects. To publish EF (or in this particular case OF) observations (ProfileObservations) in an...
                          • Katharina SCHLEIDT

                            By Katharina SCHLEIDT

                            Hi Florian,

                            a few bits:

                            On your datamodel diagram - be aware of the fact that you're only displaying attributes from the final derivation level (so only the attributes specified for EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility, but none of those already specified for AbstractMonitoringFeature or AbstractMonitoringObject, i.e. inspireId, geometry, ...)

                            Also, one of the discussions we've been having in the last years is the OperationalActivityPeriod vs. the EnvironmentalMonitoringActivity. These 2 evolved a bit in parallel, once we were done we realized the semantic similarity. However, the OperationalActivityPeriod has been formalized as required in the IRs, whereas EnvironmentalMonitoringActivity is optional, and nobody has had the time or energy to rectify this :(

                            If you check D2.9, you'll see that Observations should also reference their EMF via the Observation Parameter; described in 7.1.6 Linking to monitoring facility / network. Here we have a requirement and a recommendation:

                            /req/inspire-om-core/relatedMonitoringFeature-parameter: To make a reference to an Environmental Monitoring Facility or an Environmental Monitoring Network from an OM_Observation, a ‘parameter’ attribute SHALL be provided, whose ‘name’ attribute is 'relatedMonitoringFeature' and whose ‘value’ attribute is the external object identifier of the referenced spatial object.

                            /rec/inspire-om-core/relatedMonitoringFeature-URI: In case the observation ‘parameter’ is used, its ‘value’ attribute SHOULD be a resolvable HTTP URI

                            To my view, all required temporal information is available, I don't see the added benefit of the link to OAP. If you want all observations from an EMF for a given time period, query the observations linked to this EMF as described above and specify the phenomenonTime

                            As to the linking via xlink:href - this is essential for the model to work (you can't do a linked model without links ;) ). What's a bit tricky is providing resolvable links in the xlink; as this is a general problem in INSPIRE we provided information in the Workshop on Practical INSPIRE, see: https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/presentations/mp18_pdf_final.pdf

                            Does this help, or did I miss something?

                            :?

                            Kathi

                            • Florian Hoedt

                              Hi Kathi

                              First things first: Thank you for your great feedback by pointing me to the Dx.x paragraphs ironing out some of my concerns. It is a pleasure to dive deep into this and more and more painting an inspiring picture.


                              Also, one of the discussions we've been having in the last years is the OperationalActivityPeriod vs. the EnvironmentalMonitoringActivity. These 2 evolved a bit in parallel, once we were done we realized the semantic similarity. However, the OperationalActivityPeriod has been formalized as required in the IRs, whereas EnvironmentalMonitoringActivity is optional, and nobody has had the time or energy to rectify this :(

                              As far as I understood those two, they should be read as:

                              EnvironmentalMonitoringActivity (EMA): A specific survey of the vessel.

                              OperationalActivityPeriod (OPA): The timespan the vessel is in active duty.

                              Therefore the OPA should allways cover all EMA.

                              >> Are you with me?


                              To my view, all required temporal information is available, I don't see the added benefit of the link to OAP. If you want all observations from an EMF for a given time period, query the observations linked to this EMF as described above and specify the phenomenonTime

                              I elaborate a bit more about this:

                              I have discovered a EMA I am interested in, eg. a crangon survey at greenland. To fetch all data for this specific survey I would need to query like this:

                              1. get EMF (myEMF) from myEMA.uses
                              2. get Observations from myEMF.hasObservation (myObservations)
                              3. query myObservations where myObservation.phenomenonTime is BETWEEN myEMA.activityTime.TimePeriod.begin AND myEMA.activityTime.TimePeriod.end

                              just to get all Obersvations carried out at this particular EMA. This is something I see as cumbersome for later usage of EF data. Nonetheless you totally could find the data you search for.


                              As to the linking via xlink:href - this is essential for the model to work (you can't do a linked model without links ;) ). What's a bit tricky is providing resolvable links in the xlink; as this is a general problem in INSPIRE we provided information in the Workshop on Practical INSPIRE, see: https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/presentations/mp18_pdf_final.pdf

                              Great ressource! Thank you for sharing this. I now do understand the purpose and need for xlinks and see the application possibilites (as demoed) much clearer.


                              On your datamodel diagram - be aware of the fact that you're only displaying attributes from the final derivation level (so only the attributes specified for EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility, but none of those already specified for AbstractMonitoringFeature or AbstractMonitoringObject, i.e. inspireId, geometry, ...)

                              Thats what I meant by 'simplified'. Most of those where not needed for me to understand the top level view of the datamodel. My diagram is neither comprehensive nor valid UML or ER. It just helped me a lot to understand the general structure of the different featureTypes and how those are bound (or not) together.

                              • Katharina SCHLEIDT

                                By Katharina SCHLEIDT

                                Hi Florian,

                                to return the complement - thanks for asking real questions here! To my experience too many folks are scared of asking; as you have shown, many of these questions are very relevant and have not been clarified in a satisfactory manner, but until folks start asking the right questions here, we don't even have a mandate to clarify!

                                A bit more background to the discrepancy between OAP and EMA - this also has to do with the evolution of the model. At first we only had the OAP, then EMA and EMP were added to cover administrative aspects; at the same time we were under pressure not to overload the models with non-spatial stuff (EMA doesn't even have a geometry). And, while we did have a few use cases to work with (very few :( ), the focus was on defining a conceptual model; in normal IT this would then be further refined to an implementation model, but this step was ignored or delegated to the MS (but nobody ever really told them! ;) )

                                I've done a reworked UML diagram showing all relevant EF featureTypes (so leaving out the abstract hierarchy) whereby all attributes and associations inherited from these abstract ancestors are displayed. I've put it in our resource pages, fairly close to the top: https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/view/30607/efom-resources

                                I very much like your use case, as it nicely highlights real-world usability. It also shows one of the missing bits with the URI-rewriting bit for the creation of resolvable URI based GUIDs - while you have access to the specific feature referenced, you don't have a nice way of accessing the service URI for further interogation (i.e. give me ALL your observations pertaining to XXX). My current work-around is providing a link to the INSPIRE Metadata document in the gml metadata, as this would allow for automated discovery of the service URI, but this has yet to be prototyped and tested (maybe you'd like to try this?)

                                Finally, after the practial INSPIRE WS you so liked the presentation for (as well as similar ones we did on O&M and Coverage data models) we came to the conclusion that what would really be helpful for implementers would be 2-3 day hands-on-clinics (bring your own data, models, mapping and configuration problems (and ideally (remote) access to your infrastructure), and we'll help to sort things interactively. Would you see such events as useful? Would you consider attending?

                                :)

                                Kathi

                              • Nicolas de Ville de Goyet
                                Nicolas de Ville de Goyet replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                Hello Kathi and Peter, Thanks for your inputs. I'll see how I can manage all that. Cheers, Nicolas view reply
                                • Peter BAUMANN
                                  Peter BAUMANN replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                  Hi Nicolas, maybe WCS is worth looking at indeed - in the end, raster data constitute coverages as per OGC, and WCS has a lot of streamlined functionality for making access easy, such as subsetting in space, time, and bands; scaling; CRS... view reply
                                  • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                    Katharina SCHLEIDT replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                    Hi Nicolas, while I do remember there being some issues on OM Observations and GeoServer (haven't tried much), the simple out-of-band setup you provided above is quite doable:... view reply
                                    • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                      Katharina SCHLEIDT uploaded the file Geoserver Mapping for O&M out-of-band encoding
                                      • Nicolas de Ville de Goyet
                                        Nicolas de Ville de Goyet replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                        Hey Kathi, Here is my gml file for the NetCDF file. So far, the gml file are only stored on a simple static ATOM service so that we are INSPIRE compliant for the MSFD reporting 2018. It is quite ennoying to see that geoserver is not able to... view reply
                                        • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                          Katharina SCHLEIDT uploaded the file SDN_EF_SamplingPoint_EFSP_D278_MBANCT01.xml Update
                                          Correct version of SDN_EF_SamplingPoint_EFSP_D278_MBANCT01.xml
                                          • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                            Katharina SCHLEIDT commented on the file SDN_EF_SamplingPoint_EFSP_D278_CPHLPM01
                                            Note: i made a mistake uploading the files, and wrongly provided the fild for SDN_EF_SamplingPoint_EFSP_D278_MBANCT01 above. The correct file is  
                                            • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                              Katharina SCHLEIDT uploaded the file SDN_EF_SamplingPoint_EFSP_D278_CPHLPM01.xml updated
                                              This time it should be the correct SDN_EF_SamplingPoint_EFSP_D278_CPHLPM01.xml file
                                              • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                                Katharina SCHLEIDT replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                                Hi Nicolas, 2 thoughts to your big NetCDF file with eleven measured observed properties: provide 11 Observations linking to the same resource (the NetCDF file) depending on the size of the NetCDF file, you could also consider serving it... view reply
                                                • Nicolas de Ville de Goyet
                                                  Nicolas de Ville de Goyet replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                                  mmmh probably because I wasn't paying enough attention I guess... I intended to use the simple xlink:href indeed... This file is not big so I don't think it's a problem for the user if he downloads it for nothing. However I do have... view reply
                                                  • Katharina SCHLEIDT
                                                    Katharina SCHLEIDT replied on the discussion topic O&M out-of-band encoding
                                                    Hi Nicolas, nice to see something finally happening here (and nice to see I didn't scare you too much in Antwerp ;) ) Currently have some issues with my XML validator (that machine is busy), but wondering why you didn't just xlink the... view reply
                                                  Environmental Monitoring & Observations

                                                  Environmental Monitoring & Observations

                                                  Environmental Monitoring Facilities, Observations and Measurements