WG standards for data access/exchange

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Status on the Mapping of Metadata Standards
Advertisements

Routemap to derive ISO models from BUFR Why do we need both ISO and BUFR models? –The BUFR data model is very large – much larger in principle than most.
National Environmental Research Institute, University of Aarhus, Denmark GIS Guidance update.
Proposed update of Technical Guidance for INSPIRE Download services based on SOS Matthes Rieke, Dr. Albert Remke (m.rieke, 52°North.
Spatial Data Infrastructure: Concepts and Components Geog 458: Map Sources and Errors March 6, 2006.
The MedWet Web Information System: An SDI application Lena S. Hatziiordanou / Greek Biotope Wetland Centre (EKBY) Panagiotis T. Katsaros / Department of.
1 ISO – Metadata Next Generation International consensus being built on structured metadata within a broader Geomatics Standard under ISO Technical.
Copyright © 2006, Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc., All Rights Reserved. The OGC and Emergency Services: GML for Location Transport & Formats & Mapping.
New ways to geo-reference and classify spatial data in Annex II & III data specifications Clemens Portele interactive instruments GmbH Drafting Team „Data.
Update on INSPIRE: INSPIRE maintenance and implementation and INSPIRE related EEA activities on biodiversity CDDA/European protected areas technical meeting.
EuroGeographics Workshop Network Service, Paris, /06 Download services Olaf Østensen Network Services Drafting Team.
Interoperability ERRA System.
Metadata and Geographical Information Systems Adrian Moss KINDS project, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
What is Information Modelling (and why do we need it in NEII…)? Dominic Lowe, Bureau of Meteorology, 29 October 2013.
Volker Busch-Geertsema (GISS) Barbara Illsley (University of Dundee UK) European Commission MPHASIS Mutual Progress on Homelessness through Advancing and.
Implementing INSPIRE Geoportal in Turkey Gencay SERTER City and Regional Planner 1 Ministry of Environment And Forestry Department of IT.
XIth International Congress for Mathematical Geology - September 3-8, 2006 – Liège, Belgium Contribution of GeoScienceML to the INSPIRE data harmonisation.
The CGI: Advancing International Geoscience Data Interoperability John Broome - CGI Council - Earth Sciences Sector, Natural Resources Canada.
1 - DG ENV Brussels, 5 March 2003 Draft INSPIRE Legislative proposal The key issues 9th INSPIRE Expert Group Meeting Brussels.
The Geographic Information System of the European Commission (GISCO) By Albrecht Wirthmann, GISCO, Eurostat ESPON.
Develop Use Cases Evaluate Existing Models Develop/Extend Model Test ModelDocument 1. Commercial This use-case involves identifying the location and properties.
WIGOS Data model – standards introduction.
Testing - an essential aspect of establishing an SDI Clemens Portele, Anders Östman, Michael Koutroumpas, Xin He, Janne Kovanen, Markus Schneider, Andriani.
Geography Markup Language (GML). GML What is GML? – Scope  The Geography Markup Language is  a modeling language for geographic information  an encoding.
1 The FGDC Standards Program Presented by Julie Binder Maitra FGDC Standards Coordinator To Interagency Council on Standards Policy June 4, 2003.
ESRI Education User Conference – July 6-8, 2001 ESRI Education User Conference – July 6-8, 2001 Introducing ArcCatalog: Tools for Metadata and Data Management.
GeoSciML meeting April 24th-28th 2006 INSPIRE Drafting teams.
Core elements of GIS Guidance and practical steps toward harmonisation By Albrecht Wirthmann, GISCO, Eurostat 2 nd.
ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use INSPIRE Orthoimagery TWG Status Report Antonio Romeo ESRIN 15/02/2012.
SDI 4.0 Crowd-sourcing, Gov-sourcing Geographic Data via Open Geosynchronization Raj R. Singh Director, Interoperability Programs Open Geospatial Consortium.
® Sponsored by SOS 2.0 Profile For Hydrology 90th OGC Technical Committee Washington, DC Michael Utech 26 March 2014 Copyright © 2014 Open Geospatial Consortium.
Bavarian Agency for Surveying and Geoinformation AAA - The contribution of the AdV in an increasing European Spatial Data Infrastructure - the German Way.
Geospatial metadata Prof. Wenwen Li School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning 5644 Coor Hall
European Monitoring Platform for Mapping of QoS and QoE
Components People Technology Policies Standards Spatial Data.
Question: How do we generate map products within WasserBLIcK ?
Michael Lutz INSPIRE MIG-T meeting #38 Ghent March 2017
Concept of a Danube River Basin GIS
OGC Standards Overview
Common Framework for Earth Observation Data
Laboratory on Geoinformatics and Cartography
CEOP/IGWCO Joint Meeting, Feb.28  March 4, University of Tokyo, Japan
Project Coordination Group (PCG) for the implementation of the MSFD
Temporary Capacity Restrictions: TCR WG & TCR tool
AIXM 5 Development Status
[draft] Conclusions, actions & next steps
Design central EMODnet portal Objectives and Technical description Initial draft prepared by the Flanders Marine Institute.
Session 2: Metadata and Catalogues
GISCO Working Party October 2001
Geographical Information System
Cordination of Geographic Information in the Commission and the ESS
Information on projects
Hans Dufourmont Eurostat Unit E4 – Structural Funds
Proposal of a Geographic Metadata Profile for WISE
Directive 2007/60/EC Draft concept paper on reporting and compliance checking for the Floods Directive.
EU Water Framework Directive
Flood hazard maps and Flood risk maps – next steps
[draft] Conclusions, actions & next steps
Lessons learned from WFD reporting and follow-up
The GISCO progress report 2001/2002
Hans Dufourmont Eurostat Unit E4 – Structural Funds
Daniel Rase - Eurostat - Unit F4
Concept paper on the assessment of WFD River Basin Management Plans
SDI from a technological perspective: Standards
NEW STEPS IN THE PROJECT GIS NATURA 2000
QoS Metadata Status 106th OGC Technical Committee Orléans, France
GIS Guidance for WISE supporting reporting and application of data
eContentplus 2007 Work Programme
4.1 What is WISE compatible
WISE and INSPIRE By Albrecht Wirthmann, GISCO, Eurostat
Presentation transcript:

WG standards for data access/exchange Annoni, Wirthman, Vanderhaegen, Avillez, Thomas, Milego

Topics addressed Collection Reporting Documentation (metadata) Reference systems Exchange Access

Background A final European GIS will most probably be based on a combination of compatible national systems and the proposed European system, which may be shared between Member States, the Commission and the European Environment Agency. Ideally this system should allow for a multi-scale approach, being able to provide more generalised (aggregated) information at the European level and detailed information at the level of the Member States, river basins and sub-basins. Most probably this implies individual systems, which have compatible data structures.

Data collection The way data is collected and its quality and coverage will vary from organisation to organisation and it will have been created from a variety of source scales and base mapping data sets. It is not assumed that the data sets that organisations already capture for their own requirements will be re-captured for the purposes of this project or to meet a common data standard. To ensure that users are fully aware of the content and source of each data set and are able to use it appropriately, and know which organisation to contact for any further guidance, it is recommended that all data sets are documented using a standard agreed format (to be defined by this wg). In the long term it is recommended to harmonise the quality of data collection

Data reporting Generalisation Direct digitization Quality assessment If the data are generalised from more precise data the generalisation process should be documented Including a sample of the original and derived data for certification Direct digitization If the data are directly digitized at a scale close to the reporting scale, the standard cartographic accuracy should be guaranteed Used map should be documented Quality assessment A quality ensure plan (QAP) should produced by Member States. The content of the QAP should be agreed upon. Th QA should be proved by documenting the results in the metadata. QA is responsibility of MS European harmonisation (seamless data) The proposed generalisation process should be approved by ??? Members States data should be harmonised by ???

Data documentation It is strongly recommended that full information about the original data be provided in a standard metadata format It is mandatory to document all data required to report ISO 19115 metadata should be adopted Core fields are not sufficient A specific profile should be developped in collaboration with INSPIRE and COGI XML should be used to transfer metadata Metadata should in native language for shared data Bilingual metadata using English language (as second language) is recommended To support automatic translation services a Thesaurus and a Data Dictionnary should be developed by thematic experts

Reference systems Coordinates should be provided in geographic Coordinate reference system: ETRS89

Data exchange The Geography Markup Language (GML) is an XML encoding for the transport and storage of geographic information, including both the spatial and non-spatial properties of geographic features. Provide an open, vendor-neutral framework for the definition of geospatial application schemas and objects; Support the storage and transport of application schemas and data sets; A common data structure for data reporting should be agreed this is responsibility of the data model task It is recommended that MS send data in GML format according to the agreed data structure In the short term the shapefile format will also be accepted

Data access Topic to be addressed Proposed approach Users of a shared GIS Reporting (In alternative to data exchange) Others (To be coordinated by DG ENV) Discovery Catalog services Use Display & Query Web based approach (OGC ?, W3C, ...) Ad hoc development for a Application server Restrictions Copyright, IPR, Confidentiality State of the data + mechanism to ensure the legal status ! Proposed approach Identify data needed Set up use cases Postpone choices about technology to be used (standards and interoperability are on progress)