Hi Kathi,

Could you please, share your work at PostGIS, configs and views.

Regards,

Maha

Hi Maha,

counter question - what INSPIRE themes are you currently working on?

Packaging the GeoServer and DB Configuration does take time, and nobody pays for it. I will soon be putting up the configuration for Hydrographic Networks and Environmental Monitoring Facilities via the API4INSPIRE project (link below). There you'll also find information on SensorThings API, an interesting alternative to WFS for provision of Environmental Monitoring Facilities as well as our work on OGC API - Features.

:)

Kathi

https://datacoveeu.github.io/API4INSPIRE/

Hi Maha,

some things go faster than one things, I've done a first configuration page for Hydrographic Networks and Transport Water. Contains the DB SQL, App Schema Configuration, and a bit of support for understanding the data model (not easy!)

https://datacoveeu.github.io/API4INSPIRE/ogc-api/GS-Config-HY.html

If this page is confusing, please don't despair, as this is one of the more complex models. However, if you can provide feedback on how to make the page better, please get back to me on this!

:)

Kathi

Dear Marco,

Many thanks for this good news!

Surely many platform members will be interested in attending.

Jordi

Dear Veronika,

Robert Tomas drew my attention to your post. I am currently working on tehcnical guidelines for the IACS community that is going to to share the spatial data collected under the Common Agricultural Policy. Our stakeholders ask for a recommendation - what  is "better" to apply datasets or dataset series for the scope of metadata. As there is no simple answer, partly inspired from your post I  put together some aspects in a document - among them is one of linking services and the metadata. Another important aspect is to keep metadata at the highest possible level - this is what ISO 19 115 recommends too. I also summarised the decision workflow that is below.

Dear Katalin,

one question to your first condition - are you sure you have the negatives straight on this one?

I believe it would be more understandable if you reformulated condition 1 to the positive as follows:

1. The datasets to be published have a common heritage

To my current logic, the conditions stay correct with this reformulation (as my feeling is telling me that it's currently backwards - if the datasets have a common heritage, they automatically become a series?)

:?

Kathi