MIWG-8 Update TG Metadata

1. MIWG-8 Update TG Metadata Status 2015-12-02 Rome Michael Östling

2. MIWP-8 Update of TG Metadata • Initial plan and work on ToR • Strategic decisions on SDS • Issues with Architecture using ISO, OGC and W3C standards • Memberstates feedback August 2015 • Release A and B remaining work • Current release plan

3. Issues from ToR mme_Update_TG_Metadata https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/metadata/wiki/Work_programme_Update_TG_Metadata

4. Work om SDS • Changes in SDS • During initial work we started to investigate some of the background work done on the SDS. • We suggested a simper implementation of SDS that would not imply making an extension to ISO 19115 as the original implementation suggested. • This delayed the work on SDS several months. • But the implementation now suggested will be substantially easier and less costly to implement for member states. We therefore think the delay was worth it. • To make up for some of this delay, metadata for SDS is temporary extracted into a separate document  so that an early warning document could be made available for member states.

5. Responses from member states on issues in TG Metadata • Constraints applying to access and use • Language neutral identifiers • Coupled resources • 13 Countries responded

6. Constraints applying to access and use • A Change implementation so it is done according to ISO • B Keep existing implementation [ 3] Preference for approach A (but approach B would also be acceptable)[ 3] Strong preference for approach A (approach B should be avoided) = 6 [ 5] Preference for approach B (but approach A would also be acceptable)[ 1] Strong preference for approach B (approach A should be avoided)=6

7. Language neutral identifiers • ( 2) We strongly suggest using an Anchor element • ( 5) We prefer using an Anchor element but could also accept current implementation using a free text field =7 • ( 6) We prefer to keep current implementation but could also accept the change to a Anchor element • (0) We strongly suggest keeping the element as a free text field =6

8. Coupled resources • ( 2) We strongly suggest make only the Unique Resource Identifier as mandatory • (2) We prefer setting the Unique Resource Identifier as mandatory but could also accept the solution in existing technical guidelines. =5 • (5) We prefer to keep solution in existing technical guidelines but could also accept the change to make the Unique Resource Identifier as mandatory • (4) We strongly suggest keeping the solution in existing technical guidelines =9

9. Interoperability issues between standards • Lack of testingArchitectural level ISOISO 19115 Metadata W3CXlinkXpointer OGCOGC-WMS OGCCSW ISO api

10. Issue on how to fulfill the rules in the Implementing rules • IR Metadata should be standards neutral. Meaning we should in IR not mention technical details of the implmentation. • Still the IR do mention the term metadata-element. How should the term metadata-element be interpreted ? • The the IR metadata-element must map 1:1 with a corrensponding pysical element in the standard used for implementation. • Or • That the IR-metadata element must map to information that exists in the standard used, for implementation possible using xpath-expression possible invovlving multiple elements.

11. Issues from ToR mme_Update_TG_Metadata https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/metadata/wiki/Work_programme_Update_TG_Metadata

12. Release plan • The original plan was to publish two releases, A and B • The original release on version A was planned for then end of June 2015and for Release B end of December 2016.We see now that we will be ca 6 months late with this release A. • MIWP-8 had its kick-off Nov 17th 2014. After a quite pro-longed phase of creating the ToR.

13. Published drafts • One major problem the group has is to get feedback on the drafts published.The drafts published on the WIKI is done at following dates.Version 0.1 Date: 2015-03-27 • Version 0.2 Date: 2015-05-06 • Version 0.3 Date: 2015-06-15 • Version 0.4 Date: 2015-07-27 • Version 0.5 Date: 2015-11-09

14. Delayed responses • But we get conflicting comments on the drafts in late stages that makes us having to redo work we expected already to have finalized This slows down the process. • Maybe we need to add some breakpoints where changes in decisions can not be done.The work is of course also dependent of availability of resources in member states that are available for working into the group..

15. Updated Relase plan • At the Malmö meeting it was decided to focus on a single release Release A and B • We had a discussion on how the publication of release A and B should be managed. • Should we wait for issues in release B to be finalized before any document was published?We concluded that we need to publish the results found so far as soon as possible and not wait for issues in Release B. • When inspecting the actual issues in Release B we found then several of these are more like investigations than actual updates of TG Metadata. • This means that there will only be one release and that is the current document we are working on right now

16. Issues scheduled for Release B • MIWP-8 (A) Conditions applying to access and useThis is already included in Release A • MIWP-8 (C) Harmonized restrictions/licenses • This is still to do.  • There is a group within MIG, MIWP 17 that will work on  "Data and service sharing & licensing models " • It is suggested that the work MIWP-8 (C) Harmonized restrictions/licenses  is done in conjunction with work in MIWP-17. It may not lead to an update of TG Metadata.

17. Issues scheduled for Release B (that will not be published as part of TG Metadata)(Cont) MIWP-8 (E-2) Review applicability of 19157 for (Theme specific) metadata Initially handled in Relase A.Relates closesly to F MIWP-8 (F) Relation to ISO19115-1:2014 This is a investigation that should lead to a roadmap for INSPIRE TG Metadata. It does not have to be published into the TG Metadata document.

18. Issues scheduled for Release B (that will not be published as part of TG Metadata) (cont) • MIWP-8 (H) Metadata for monitoring • This is mainly to give support to the workgroup MIWP-16: Improve usefulness and reliability of monitoring information that was created in parallel with MIWP-8There are no real tasks for MIWP-8 left as far as we see it. • MIWP-8 (G) Conformance classes in registryThis work can be seen as partly started where we in current TG Metadata extend the use of gmx:Anchor and xlink:href to refer to external resources. The task was originally  to unify the way qualityreports for conformance reports was written between the technical Guideines for data (Data specfications) and the TG Metadata. We shall see if we can included these exampes during work in November.MIWP-8 (K) Add Abstract Test suite • This is mainly to give support to the workgroup MIWP-5: Validation and conformity testing where the Abstract Test Suite have been written. There are no direct tasks for MIWP-8 regarding. ATSs 

19. Cleaner requeriements • Clearly separate • IR Requirements • TG Requirements (eg ISO 19115/ISO 19139) • Notes • Use fully the data dictionary tables to express requirements

20. Schedule for the TG Metadata document • ¶ • Final work for MIWP-8 to make final corrections to make the final draft-document: Nov 20th • Contracted editor works through draft and creates a Final Draft: mid-January • Document is sent for comments to MIG-T: end-January   

21. New TG Metadata document • Will be named version 2.0 • There will be a 3 year transitional phase where implementations for IR metadata elements can be implemented either way (version 1.3 and 2.0)

22. Comments ! Michael Östling