inspire-mif / helpdesk

Community discussion for generic INSPIRE related topics

INSPIRE helpdesk

This space is used for discussions and announcements on general INSPIRE topics. Before reporting a problem or asking a question here, please make sure that the problem or question is not relevant to (only) a specific INSPIRE component. If this is the case, please use the dedicated helpdesks for the Validator, Geoportal or Registry.

Use the Discussions tab to start a discussion or raise a question for the helpdesk or the INSPIRE community related to a generic INSPIRE matter, or use the issue tracker to report a generic problem related to INSPIRE that the helpdesk team should solve or assign to the relevant people.

Be aware that the "New discussion" button is available only to logged users.

Please follow our Code of Conduct anytime when you interact with the INSPIRE community in this space.

Please note that the former INSPIRE Community Forum, which was used for domain-specific discussions about INSPIRE, was discontinued as of January 31, 2021. Its content has been archived and can still be accessed here.

Please note: If you are trying to access a known URL from the archived forum directly, you can do this by prepending https://wayback.archive-it.org/12090/20210119102755/ to your https URL.

helpdesk's Issues

attributes "inspireId", "beginLifeSpanVersion", "endLifeSpanVersion" different behavior

Hi,

I've just noticed that the attributes in the application schemas "Energy Resources Vector" and "Energy Resource Coverage" of the UML Consolidated Model do not get transformed into properties by ShapeChange, although other attributes do get transformed into properties in the resulting .ttl fie. What do you think could be the reason for that? How are these attributes different from all other attributes across the model?' Thanks in advance.

Are simplified data encoded as GeoJson considered INSPIRE compliant?

Hi,

As the OGC API Feature has now been accepted as an alternative way to implement an INSPIRE Download service, I'd like to know whether OGC API Feature services that provide data in GeoJson following the rules set out in the MIG activity 2017.2 (links below) are considered to be INSPIRE complaint?

https://github.com/INSPIRE-MIF/2017.2/blob/master/GeoJSON/geojson-encoding-rule.md
https://github.com/INSPIRE-MIF/2017.2/blob/master/model-transformations/TransformationRules.md

Or is there an additional procedure required?

This is crucial to know for example when a data provider asks whether they can now replace their WFS services, which are providing harmonised data sets with their new OGC API Features services, providing data sets in GeoJson following these rules.

A confirmation for this would be very helpful eg. @MarcoMinghini , thanks.

Lena

Inspire coverages and WCS

Hello I wanted to ask about the official status for the approach of having a wcs download service and providing Inspire feature data like OrthoimageCoverage in the metadata section of the inspire parent feature (like RectifiedGridCoverage).

Has there a request been made yet ? Anyone knows ?

Kind regards
János

Status of INSPIRE Coverage Good Practice

Status of INSPIRE Coverage Good Practice
All further discussions will be linked from here

Spatial plans of municipalities/cities/ egions in EU member states and development of related services

Dear all,

could you please share your experiences with the development of services and harmonization for official spatial plans of regions/cities/municipalities in your country?

We are especially interested in:

• In what format are the official spatial plans of regions/cities/municipalities in your country?
• If the official version of the spatial plan is in analog form, but there is a scanned version (such as pdf, jpg, tiff) - is it INSPIRE spatial data (example attached)? With or without the legend?
• If the plans are made in electronic form (according to the law), but the official version is analogous - is it INSPIRE data?
• What type of data do your spatial plans contain (eg buildings, traffic, infrastructure (which), telecommunications, public lighting ...)?
• Since buildings on spatial plans contain, for example, a lower level of detail than in the theme Buildings, it is not necessary to separate them by individual themes?
• Is there an obligation in EU/INSPIRE legislation to develop INSPIRE harmonized network services for scanned spatial plans?
• According to which scheme do you harmonize your spatial plans? Eg. our spatial plans contain both Existing and Planned Land use.
• If you have developed INSPIRE compliant network services for spatial plans, are they available on the INSPIRE Geoportal (as an example)?

According to The Data Specification on Land Use the following is defined/explained (but Member States don’t have to implement Data Specifications, right?):

(pg. 13) „The Planned Land Use or PLU (future planned land use in the above definition), which is composed of spatial plans, defined by spatial planning authorities, depicting the possible utilization of the land in the future. The corresponding application schema contains either a vector data or a raster data.“
(pg. 16) „Although the original planned Land Use documents are legally binding the derived INSPIRE dataset is not.“
(pg. 52, 53) „The scanned version of any maps included in spatial planning documents may also be associated to the spatial plan («dataType» DocumentCitation). The objective for the provision of scanned map is two fold:
• allow the provision of the scanned version of the official spatial plan together with the vector SpatialPlan because only the paper based version is the official one in many member states,
• allow the provision of spatial plans in digital form where no vector data exists. The attribute planDocument of the feature type OfficialDocumentation must be used to provide scanned version of a spatial plan either as text, image or georeferenced image. The MIME extension should be used to inform on its format.“
(pg. 57) „Spatial plans are legal documents that regulate what developments are allowed, allowed under certain circumstances and not allowed in an area. The various parts of the plan use the OfficialDocumentation object to make references to the legal text or a specific location in the legal document or even to other documents such as scanned versions of the plan. Furthermore, Spatial Plans can be provided as scanned documents or structural drawing that are not always geo-referencable maps (See Figure 30 as an example).“
(pg. 156) Features „In most of the European countries old plans are not always converted into polygon features. These plans are however (or most of them) required as a geo-referenced raster image.“
Portrayal „A non geo-referenced legend file (tiff or pdf) must be exchanged for each plan, which enumerates all the used symbols on the plan and their title. For getting more detailed information on the meaning of the symbol set the textual part itself has to be consulted.“

Population distribution (demography) layer naming conventions

The statistics community discussed about layer naming conventions for the Population distribution (demography) PD theme

Statistics Sweden was trying to configure INSPIRE compliant view services for population distribution (population in 1 x 1 km grids) and was struggeling to understand the naming conventions to be used for the layers in the service. When validating view services, the ETF validator complained about the name element of the layers in the WMS because according to the validator the names do not follow specs. They could not find any guidance in the TG or in the INSPIRE layer register under PD. Hence, the services do not follow the specs but there seems to be no specs to follow.

The lack of a layer name for PD is the result of the PD theme not carrying geometry itself but deriving it from the SU (statistical units) theme. Therefore a valid geographical reference for PD data would be a SU.VectorStatisticalUnit or SU.GridStatisticalUnit layer. The human health theme (somewhat similar to PD) has a HH.HealthStatisticalData layer which is of HealthStatisticalUnit type, so the analogy can be carried to the SU-PD tandem.

The Netherlands created their own naming convention:
pd-nl-nuts2-2018
pd-nl-lau-2018
pd-nl-grid-2012 (metadata in English can be found here: https://www.nationaalgeoregister.nl/geonetwork/srv/dut/catalog.search#/metadata/76541ebb-a554-4540-a017-399d4bb4a860)
as well as for HH:
hh-nl-nuts2-doctors-2017
hh-nl-nuts2-death-2016
Metadata link: https://www.nationaalgeoregister.nl/geonetwork/srv/dut/catalog.search#/metadata/12bb57cd-73e0-41ba-a1e9-6d986b9109d3

Austria also uses their own layer naming, imitating the naming of the other themes: PD.StatisticalDistribution. And for the health theme they use the HH.HealthStatisticalData layer.

Any other suggestions as to layer naming for PD?

Custom ExtendedCapabilities elements not supported

We are testing our service against the validation tool for "View Services - WMS and WMTS (TG version 3.11)". The endpoint of our service is : http://sdidemo.intergraph.pl/WMS_Iowa/service.svc/get?request=GetCapabilities&service=WMS

We use an extension in an ExtendedCapabilities element, but the validator does not seem to accept it. It does not accept it for the UserDefinedSymbolization either.

The test report is here : https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/validator/v2/TestRuns/EID31ce68a2-4469-41b2-8172-32a1724e16f1.html

Is that something not valid for INSPIRE View service or an error in the validator ?
Thanks

implementation of historic data

Dear all,

We have harmonized geodata concerning noise contours for major airports in the German State of Brandenburg (relevant Annex-Theme is “Human Health And Safety”).

WMS: https://inspire.brandenburg.de/services/hh_fluglaerm_wms?service=WFS&request=GetCapabilities

These contours were published in 2017 and are part of strategic noise maps which (according to the Directive 2002/49 /EC) have to be reviewed and re-elaborated every five years. Consequently, there are noise contours of 2007 and 2012 which are still in use and INSPIRE relevant, hence, need to be transformed into the HH-data model.

This raises the question for us how the provision of such harmonized historic dataset is dealt with:

• Does INSPIRE require a separate publication, hence, one data/webservice implementation for each year (i.e. in this case: 3 WMS/WFS for 2007, 2012 and 2017).
  or
• Is it possible to have one data/webservice implementation that includes the entire harmonized data of all years?

For now we assume it needs to be kept separately as all objects would be transformed into the same FeatureType and some datasets could potentially grow immensely in size over time . However as we are not certain, we would appreciate your advice.

Transport Network Air - AirLinkSequence - clarification request

Dear all,
the TN-A Schema for AirLinkSequence requires an ordered list of AirRouteLink elements. Unfortunately the dataType Network::DirectedLink allows only "+" and "-" for the attribute "direction".
But in reality the AirRouteLink elements of an AirRoute can be flown inDirection, inOppositeDirection or in bothDirections as described in the LinkDirectionValue.
Currently we don't see a possibility to use the attribute LinkDirectionValue in the transport network air model, which would make more sense to us. Instead we have to use the dataType Network::DirectedLink as plus or minus sign. This makes the AirLinkSequence and AirRoute not only complicated, this forces us to replicate AirRouteLink elements in the AirLinkSequence and therefore making the AirLinkSequence nearly unuseable.
Can someone please advice us how to encode it correctly?
Thanks and kind regards
Klaus

GEMET API availability

we are running into an issue frequently that the GEMET API are unavailable. We reference this API in our INSPIRE metadata editors.

example:
https://www.eionet.europa.eu/gemet/getConceptsMatchingRegexByThesaurus?thesaurus_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eionet.europa.eu%2Fgemet%2Fconcept%2F&language=en&regex=water&jsonp=dojo_request_script_callbacks.dojo_request_script1

it may respond today but not tomorrow.

Is it recommended to consume the API or perhaps to download the thesaurus and host with the application itself?

Use of UCUM to harmonize UnitOfMeasure in the Measure datatype.

Dear All,

In the INSPIRE data specifications Measure has been used to model Measurements. Part of a Measure element is a uom attribute that specifies the unit of meaure in which the value is stated, but no harmonized list of possible values is provided. A recent (well more recent than INSPIRE) initiative is the UCUM list ( https://ucum.org/trac ) which could act as a starting point for harmonization.

Now I have two questions:

• Is there any place in INSPIRE that discusses harmonizing values for Units of Meaure?
• If not, would UCUM be a good start?

Best wishes, Wilko Quak

GEMET API availability

we are running into an issue frequently that the GEMET API are unavailable.

example:
https://www.eionet.europa.eu/gemet/getConceptsMatchingRegexByThesaurus?thesaurus_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eionet.europa.eu%2Fgemet%2Fconcept%2F&language=en&regex=water&jsonp=dojo_request_script_callbacks.dojo_request_script1

is this the right place to report such issues?

apologies for the cross-posting: INSPIRE-MIF/helpdesk-validator#494

Problem with community defined code list (gmd:organisationName)

Error returned: Each contact information in a metadata record must have a non-empty organisationName. The metadata record does not fulfill this requirement.

I'm validating a SeaDataNet XML document, that is a community profile of ISO 19115 metadata (https://www.seadatanet.org/Standards/Metadata-formats/CDI), drafted according to official ISO 19115 rules.
Most likely, the test expects gmd:organisationName instead of the codelist sdn:SDN_EDMOCode that is a community defined code list.

Test Report: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/validator/v2/TestRuns/EID78510388-5466-4487-adce-6e460b23fe57.html
Assertion URI: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/validator/v2/TestRuns/EID78510388-5466-4487-adce-6e460b23fe57.html?lang=en#EIDf2b9ad7f-995d-4b1c-91b2-0645f3ea78e0
Referenced file: https://www.seadatanet.org/content/download/4534/file/CDI_ISO19139_full_example_12.2.0.xml

Priority Datasets harmonisation - WFD, FD, END etc extended schemas

We are currently running an in-house project for the harmonization of the PDS.

We are aware of the ongoing work for the extension of the INSPIRE application schemas in order to cover the needs of specific reporting obligations, as regards the provision of spatial data.

So the next reporting submissions for specific directives, like the WFD, the END, the FD, are going to include INSPIRE compliant datasets.

The question is, what is the best way to address the compliance of the spatial datasets that were reported during previous reporting rounds? Should a MS use the relevant INSPIRE application schemas (eg. AM, EF etc) to harmonize already reported priority datasets or should we wait for the new extended application schemas?

What could be considered as a best practice?

Handling of ObservingCapability.observedProperty.href and procedure.href for WFD MonitoringSites

According to p. 34 of this presentation, the values for EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility.observingCapability.ObservingCapability.observedProperty.href and EnvironmentalMonitoringFacility.observingCapability.ObservingCapability.procedure.href are "http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabularyconcept/common/NilReasonType/template".

So basically, a nilReason value is provided, but not in the nilReason attribute, but in the href attribute of the elements. The codelist value is defined as "The value will be available later."

Is it planned to provide according values or are they maybe already available and the example in the presentation is not up to date anymore?
Or is it planned to stick with the nilReason-as-href-value approach over the longterm?

Migration of INSPIRE draft-schemas to https

On March 1, 2021 all INSPIRE schemas (available under https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/schemas/) have been migrated to https. Are there any plans to migrate the INSPIRE draft-schemas (available under https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/draft-schemas/) to https as well?

Procuction and Industrial Facilities

Are the first-level Eurostat NACE rev. 2 classification categories B, C, D, E, F and H enough to produce harmonised Production and Industrial Facilities data set? In Finland municipalities may not have more detailed information content according to the EconomicActivityNACEValue code list.

Kind regards,
Hanna Horppila

What is the difference between Invocable-Interoperable-Harmonized Network Spatial Data Services?

First off all, I should understand what is exactly different with;

• Not invocable SDS
• Invocable SDS
• Interoperable SDS
• Harmonised SDS
• Network services

If someone has proper documentation I will be very grateful ..

Best Regards

Hierarchical INSPIRE Land Use Classification System (HILUCS): state of play, any revision planned?

Dear all,
has the codelist of the Inspire land use classes been revised recently, since its implementation, respectively are there any plans or content-wise reasons to do so?

Usecases of OpenSearch in INSPIRE Atom

Hi, I am with the Dutch Kadaster and as such we are managing the Dutch national catalogue and many other INSPIRE services.
We recently put effort in improving our INSPIRE compliance with respect to our OpenSearch implementation in our INSPIRE Atom feeds. That made me wonder if anyone knows of a use case of OpenSearch in relation to the INSPIRE Atom, that is used in practice. I do not know of any use cases of OpenSearch in the ATOM services we manage.

So I am curious to see if there is any use of OpenSearch, since I am unaware. My intention is to start a discussion on the benefit of OpenSearch requirement in the INSPIRE Atom download service. With the current information I have at my disposal I do not see much benefit of OpenSearch for INSPIRE Atom services, other than compliance.

How to provide codes for noise in HH?

Hi,

In July 2019, Stefania mentioned which noise codelists to use to provide noise data in INSPIRE HH in this forum discussion
Unfortunately, the second page of this thread can not be loaded any longer in the archived version.
She is also relating to a change proposal which I guess is described here.
According to the UML diagram, the NoiseSourceTypeValue should be made available in a UomNoise object.
As the HH xsd uses gml:MeasureType for EnvHealthDeterminantMeasure.measure (discussed in this forum post) and there such is no occurrence of UomNoise, it is still not clear to me how to indicate a link to the Eionet codelist in the INSPIRE HH schema.
Could someone please indicate where to put the Eionet codes or provide an example where this is realized?

Thanks and all the best

Johanna

Importance of SDSs, other than Network services?

Hi,

Finland would like make an inquiry regarding the importance of Spatial Data Services (other than Network services) and of providing metadata for them. The last deadline of INSPIRE next year is related to this, and more precisely:
“10-Dec-2021 All invocable spatial data services shall be conformant with Annexes VI and (where practicable) VII of [INS ISDSS]”
But to be honest there is also a gap in meeting earlier deadlines related to these kinds of services..

As a background, is doesn’t seem to be much focus on them in the present EU level SDI as:

• in the INSPIRE Geoportal focus is put, it seems, only on view and download services.
• the web site which should provide examples of SDS from the yearly Member States’ monitoring is empty: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/id/document/tg/sds/4.0/examples
• they are not highlighted in the MIG work program 2020-2024

So Finland wonders, what the priority of SDSs (other than the view and download (network) services) actually is so that we can allocate resources on the coordination and implementation of this accordingly next year. Could you please give us some guidance on this?

Best regards,
Lena

Indirect Spatial Datasets

Hello,

I hope you are all right at JRC.

I work fort the Blegian Land Register Administration. I am trying to create metadata about statistics concerning real estate transactions. These will be indrect spatial datasets. These are not really considered by the TG 2.0 for the implementation of INSPIRE datasets.

My concerns are about the linking of such a dataset to a the datasets containing the dataset. I will write in the summaray where the readers can find the dataset containing the geometric features. I want to write in a machine readable XML element the id of the record describing the dataset containing the geometric features.

I was thinking about adding a gmd:aggregationInfo with the uuid of the record. It would be something like this.

Does JRC have recommandation concerning this ? Did you get any other feedback from another administration ?

gmd:aggregationInfo
gmd:MD_AggregateInformation
gmd:aggregateDataSetIdentifier
gmd:MD_Identifier
gmd:code
gco:CharacterStringfb1e2993-2020-428c-9188-eb5f75e284b9</gco:CharacterString>
</gmd:code>
</gmd:MD_Identifier>
</gmd:aggregateDataSetIdentifier>
gmd:associationType
<gmd:DS_AssociationTypeCode codeList="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19139/resources/gmxCodelists.xml#DS_AssociationTypeCode"
codeListValue="geometricFeatures"/>
</gmd:associationType>
</gmd:MD_AggregateInformation>
</gmd:aggregationInfo>

Implementing recommended theme-specific metadata elements

Hi,

I am interested in implementing the recommended theme-specific metadata elements outlined in section 8.3 of INSPIRE data specifications, specifically those related to data quality.

In section 8.3 of the protected sites data specification, for example, there are a list of optional metadata
elements including:

Logical Consistency – Conceptual Consistency 0..*
Logical Consistency – Domain Consistency 0..*
Completeness – Commission 0..*
Completeness – Omission 0..*

In Data Quality section 7.13 of the protected sites data specification it is stated that:

"The Application Schema conformance class of the Abstract Test Suite in Annex I defines a number of tests to evaluate the conceptual consistency (tests A.1.1-A.1.9) of a data set."

and in section 7.14 it is stated that:

"The Application Schema conformance class of the Abstract Test Suite in Annex I defines a number of tests to evaluate the domain consistency (tests A1.10-A.1.12) of a data set."

If a dataset passes these tests, is that sufficient to report in the associated data quality metadata elements?

Regarding the completeness of a dataset- are there any existing resources which describe the test criteria that could be used to determine commission and omission for a dataset (number of excess or missing features)?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Kind regards,
Kate

Metadata discovery service - dataset metadata record required?

I am currently working on improving the INSPIRE compliance of the Dutch national CSW service. While digging into this issue I ran into some questions.

Our discovery service is described by two metadata records:

• service metadata record
• dataset metadata record

Validating the dataset metadata against the ETF-validator (Conformance Class 2: 'INSPIRE data sets and data set series interoperability metadata') resulted in these errors:

The metadata record set has 1 record(s) with errors for this assertion.
XML document '76327507-4be4-4f2a-8d0a-83ec36656177.xml', record '76327507-4be4-4f2a-8d0a-83ec36656177': At least one keyword must have the title 'GEMET - INSPIRE themes, version 1.0'.

The metadata record set has 1 record(s) with errors for this assertion.
XML document '76327507-4be4-4f2a-8d0a-83ec36656177.xml', record '76327507-4be4-4f2a-8d0a-83ec36656177': The spatial representation type shall be given using at least one element gmd:spatialRepresentationType/gmd:MD_SpatialRepresentationTypeCode.

These validation issues seem impossible to address since:

• there is no suitable INSPIRE Data Theme for this dataset (the total collection of metadata records in the CSW)
• there is not suitable spatialRepresentationType for this dataset see [codelist](https://standards.iso.org/iso/19139/resources
  /gmxCodelists.xml#MD_SpatialRepresentationTypeCode)

This raises the question whether it is mandatory at all for INSPIRE compliance to publish dataset metadata of discovery services. I also looked at discovery services of Flanders, Luxemburg and Germany but found no dataset metadata records for discovery services. I could not find any documentation on guidelines describing in what situation publishing dataset metadata is mandatory and in what situation publishing service metadata is mandatory.

So in short, is it required by INSPIRE to publish dataset metadata for a discovery service en where can I find the relevant documentation?

Empty themes in UML diagram

Hello everybody,
What does it mean if a theme is not clickable, does not show up in the diagram, like it is the case for "Coordinate Reference System" https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/data-model/approved/r4618-ir/html/ ? Is the UML schema available for it?

Does a "EIONET <-> INSPIRE / Priority dataset" matrix exists

Hi Helpdesk,

Some of the data that has to be reported on EIONET must also be distributed under the INSPIRE and Priority Dataset legislation.
While for some EIONET reporting it is easy to find the corresponding INSPIRE theme and priority dataset legislation (if there is), for others it can be a longer process involving a lot of legislation reading.
As this job must be done by each member country, there are reason to believe that a mapping/matrix already exists.

Do you know of the existence of such mapping/matrix?
If not, can you direct us to another institution that could help us?

Thx in advance,

Fixed draft schema for US-EMF 4.0?

The endorsed US-EMF schemas contains errors. A description by @sMorrone can be found here
The draft schema was updated in March and the relevant errors are fixed, but there is only an updated draft schema for version 3.0 and not for 4.0 (see https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/draft-schemas/us-emf/).
Does anyone know if it is planned to also provide a fixed draft schema for 4.0 that could be used until the endorsed one is fixed?

Environmental Management Facilities - problem with transformation scheme

Hello,
I am applying for the Utility and Governmental Services Theme Environmental Management Facilities part data transformation. The scheme to transform these data is https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/schemas/us-emf/4.0/EnvironmentalManagementFacilities.xsd, but after the data transformation and export, information is not transferred to the GML file. Only an empty result is created (added).
US_EMF.zip
The same result is created with the older version too (https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/schemas/us-emf/3.0/EnvironmentalManagementFacilities.xsd).
I did not find any previous discussion about this question, is there a chance that the scheme could be updated?

Different statements on additional Layers for HH.HealthDeterminantMeasure in IR and DS

According to Article 14.3 of the IR, multiple layers depending on codelist values should only be provided for types, for which it is explicitely expected in the Annex by the use of specific placeholders etc: "3. For spatial object types whose objects can be further classified using a code list-valued attribute, several layers may be defined. Each of these layers shall include the spatial objects corresponding to one specific code list value. In the definition of such sets of layers in Annexes II, III and IV, all of the following requirements shall be fulfilled: (a) the placeholder shall represent the values of the relevant code list, with the first letter in upper case; (b) the placeholder shall represent the human-readable name of the code list values; (c) the spatial object type shall include the relevant attribute and code list, in parentheses; (d) one example of a layer shall be given"
For HH.HealthDeterminantMeasure, this is not the case:

I would interpret that in a way that no further classification of HH.HealthDeterminantMeasure layers is expected.

The DS for Human Health and Safety states in 11.1 that the HH layers can be further classified: "NOTE The table above contains several layers for some spatial object type(s), which can be further classified using a code list-valued attribute. Such sets of layers are specified as described in Article 14(3) of the IRs" (No grey template paragraph but explicit HH content)

To me, that is contradictory to the IR. Could you please specify what is expected here?

PS: I am aware of the discussion on adding additional, independent layers to WMS, but I want to know if there are sub-layers of HH.HealthDeterminantMeasure expected/allowed and if yes, if there are expectations on which code list-values attribute they should use for distinction.

Error in schemaLocation (ShapeChangeAppinfo.xsd) - parked domain

I'm currently using /hh/4.0/HumanHealth.xsd in deegree and this morning the following error message appeared:

Error building GML application schema: Severe error in schema document (systemId: http://portele.de/ShapeChangeAppinfo.xsd, line: 1, column: 50) White spaces are required between publicId and systemId.

In above mentioned schema, these import fails:

<import namespace="http://www.interactive-instruments.de/ShapeChange/AppInfo" schemaLocation="http://portele.de/ShapeChangeAppinfo.xsd"/>

It seems the domain name has been expired and was not renewed:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
    <head>
        <meta charset="utf-8">
        <style type="text/css">
            html, body, #partner, iframe {
                height:100%;
                width:100%;
                margin:0;
                padding:0;
                border:0;
                outline:0;
                font-size:100%;
                vertical-align:baseline;
                background:transparent;
            }
            body {
                overflow:hidden;
            }
        </style>
        <meta content="NOW" name="expires">
        <meta content="index, follow, all" name="GOOGLEBOT">
        <meta content="index, follow, all" name="robots">
        <!-- Following Meta-Tag fixes scaling-issues on mobile devices -->
        <meta content="width=device-width; initial-scale=1.0; maximum-scale=1.0; user-scalable=0;" name="viewport">
    </head>
    <body>
        <div id="partner"></div>
        <script type="text/javascript">
            document.write(
                    '<script type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript"'
                            + 'src="//sedoparking.com/frmpark/'
                            + window.location.host + '/'
                            + 'IONOSParkingDE'
                            + '/park.js">'
                    + '<\/script>'
            );
        </script>
    </body>
</html>

Download service – hybrid implementation - example

Dear all,
Do you know any example for so called „hybrid implementation“ of INSPIRE download service? It joins ATOM and WFS.

Best regards.
Veronika

Blank codelists values

Hi all,
Some codelists in the UML Consolidated Model are empty:

Foundation Schemas -> OGC -> WaterML2.0:
Codelist missing:
processingCode
DataQualityCode
InterpolationCode

Foundation Schemas -> EarthResourceML -> EarthResource -> Leaf ‘Mine’:
Codelist missing:
productTerm
MiningWasteTypeCode
WasteStorageTypeCode

Foundation Schemas -> GeoSciML-Core -> Leaf “GeologicUnit”:
Codelists missing:
(actually they are placeholders for vocabularies)
CompositionPartRoleTerm
RankTerm
GeologicUnitPartRoleTerm

Are they just placeholders for some values potentially introduced in future or they may be already available?
These codelists are not found here https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/codelist/ExplorationActivityTypeValue/approximateResourceCalculation, but some empty codelists do appear on this page. Is there any difference between those, which are mentioned here as empty, and those, which are empty but not mentioned here?

unfortunate mixing of inspire theme vocabulary locations in TG example

From metadata repository:

In this TG example there is an unfortunate mixing of 2 available locations of the inspire themes thesaurus

usage of INSPIRE registry URI's for concepts
usage of EIONET URI's for the thesaurus

I noticed some in our domain considering the combination of these 2 locations as a formal recommendation, however combining of the 2 locations should be strongly prevented.

I wonder if we could consider something in the ATS to fix this issue, or should this go back to the TG group?

Why shouldn't there be a combination of the 2 thesauri locations? The 2 thesauri use different URI's for the same concepts. A machine parsing the metadata would expect to find in the metadata the same uri identifying the thesaurus, as well as in the inScheme property of the concept.

<skos:inScheme rdf:resource="http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/theme" />

Or vice versa, if, in a metadata edit tool, users are enabled to select a keyword from a thesaurus, the thesaurus identifier would typically be filled with the inscheme property of the selected concept.

In case the combination of thesauri locations is actually intentional, then i would like to propose to use in both thesauri locations the same uri's.

How do others perceive this challenge?

Which INSPIRE theme covers power stations ?

To which INSPIRE theme the dataset representing power stations belongs? I supposed, the theme III-8-PF Production and Industrial Facilities is the right one for this purpose, but, on the other hand, theme III-20-ER Energy resources is used in certain cases as well.
Compare for example
https://inspire-geoportal.ec.europa.eu/results.html?country=de&view=details&theme=pf
and
https://inspire-geoportal.ec.europa.eu/results.html?country=de&view=details&theme=er
Windkraftanlagen and Biogasanlagen are put by one country (Germany) to different INSPIRE themes, depending on the country region.
Maybe, the option could be also to categorize the renewable sources power stations to the ER theme and fossil + nuclear fuel power stations to the PF theme, but I am not sure if such access is correct...

Thank you very much
Miroslav Fanta
CENIA, Czech Environmental Information Agency

Production and industrial facilities - problems with 47,01 IED/LCP emission dataset transformation

Hello,

I would like to ask for advice about the target schema which is appropriate for data transformation of the 47.01 IED / LCP emission dataset.
According to the Production and industrial facilities specification, the data should be transformed according to the ProductionAndIndustrialFacilities GML Application Schema (version: 4) and/or the ProductionAnIndustrialFacilitiesExtension Model GML Application Schema (version: 3).
I used the https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/schemas/pf/4.0/ProductionAndIndustrialFacilities.xsd schema in other datasets of the theme „Production and Industrial facilities“. But I don‘t know, how can I use this schema for priority dataset 47,01 IED/LCP emission. I think the main information in this priority dataset is emission data, but I can't find where I must put this information correctly. I think the correct way to show emissions is to fill in the amount, uom, also the name of the emission gas. In this case, The ProductionAndIndustrialFacilities GML Application Schema (version: 3 or 4) is not suitable for us to transform LCP emission data because some necessary feature types are not included in this schema (for example, ProductionInput, ProductionOutput).
For this reason, I used http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/draft-schemas/pf-core/2.0/ProductionAndIndustrialFacilitiesCore.xsd schema which suits to transform the LCP emission data, because important feature types for showing emission data (ProductionInput, ProductionOutput, ProductionProcess) are included in this schema. Unfortunately, it is not correct way (see discusion about it INSPIRE-MIF/helpdesk-validator#519).
Perhaps you could advise what I have to do for making the GML file 100% compliant in this case?

Aurelija

How to link to CPA codelist

Hi everybody,

In ActivityComplex.input and ActivityComplex.output, the codelist https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/codelist/InputOutputValue should be used. It points to the external codelist http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/nomenclatures/index.cfm?TargetUrl=LST_NOM_DTL&StrNom=CPA_2008&StrLanguageCode=EN&IntPcKey=&StrLayoutCode=HIERARCHIC

When navigating to one code of this codelist the URL is for example "https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/nomenclatures/index.cfm?TargetUrl=DSP_NOM_DTL_VIEW&StrNom=CPA_2008&StrLanguageCode=EN&IntPcKey=20997638&IntKey=20997741&StrLayoutCode=HIERARCHIC&IntCurrentPage=1".

Is it expected to use that kind of value for input.href or should the value be provided in a different format?

All the best

Johanna

metadataURL in Layer WMS

Question about MatadataURL element in Layer element in the WMS Capabilities document: There should be exactly one MetadataURL per layer or is it possible to have more than one MetadataURL inside one Layer element?

Thank you,
Tanja

How to check codelists's relations in the UML Consolidated Model?

Hi,
I'm just trying to find out to which type/attributes is each codelist related? How to find the stereotype in the UML Consolidated Model they hold the values for? For example, "ClassificationAndQuantificationFrameworkValue", "Renewable and Waste Value", "FossilFuelValue"?

Is "RequierementClass" an actually existing class?

Hi,
I'm trying to convert the application schema "WaterML20" from the UML consolidated model to a .ttl file with ShapeChange, but the generated ontology is almost empty (with no classes). My question is , do "Requirement Classes" really exist as types or classes in the diagram or they are just placeholders for some stereotypes?

Theme options for historical vineyard registry according Inspire

Hi, I am communicating from Greece and specifically from Rethymno, Crete. I work for the Region of Crete.
We have a dataset of vineyard parcels (historical vineyard registry) and I would like some advice in choosing the appropriate Inspire Theme, in which should be included. The dataset came out from the digitization of analog maps created in 1979.
One serious notice that I should refer is that, the cultivation of vines with wine varieties is subject under legalization of planting control and legal licensing due to regulations issued by the EC.
The feature types that have been came out from the 1979 analog file, is the geometry of the polygons, the perimeter, the “historical” code of each vineyard parcel and the area of each one in square meters. The geo parcels do not cover a continuous earth surface. They are scattered or adjacent to each other. Other crops have not been recorded. The National Land Registry for the cadastral parcels has not yet been compiled for the Region of Interest. Data set with the georeferenced parcels of vineyards that came out from the topographic diagrams could be linked to the owners’ data base that they had the property then in 1979, not nowadays.
Do you think that they could be portrayed as Site in the AF theme (Agricultural and Aquaculture Facilities)? Is there any experience or opinion that could help from other member states?

Inspire core concepts

Hello everybody,
It is quite hard to find some terms and concepts strict definitions: attribute name, feature (not only feature type, but also feature itself), attributes names, rules for attributes names. Is there a way to find these definitions in an official document?
Thanks in advance

Is it allowed to link multiple Inspire View services to one Inspire dataset?

In the technical guidance for Inspire viewservices I can find a requirement that viewservices should be linked to a spatial dataset from the service capabilities to the metadatarecord (of the viewservice and/or the spatialdataset):

Implementation Requirement 14 Each of the elements shall be populated with a URL that allows access to an unambiguous metadata record. The URL shall be either an HTTP/GET call on the GetRecordById operation of the Discovery Service or a direct link to the ISO 19139 metadata document.

Implementation Requirement 79 Layers shall provide a link to the metadata description of the spatial dataset using the “ows:Metadata” element as part of the layer metadata. This element shall be populated with a URL that allows access to an unambiguous metadata record. The URL may be either: A HTTP/GET call on the GetRecordById operation of the Discovery Service using the identifier of the metadata document; or a direct link to the metadata document.

I could not find a reference however how many viewservices are allowed to be linked to a single dataset. Therefore my question is: is it allowed to have multiple Inspire Viewservices linked to one spatial dataset?

For Download services I can find that only one INSPIRE dataset per GetCapabilities response is allowed:

TG Requirement 52 A separate WFS endpoint shall be provided for each INSPIRE dataset thus providing one dataset per GetCapabilities response

Are WPS NS or not?

According to the INSPIRE Directive are WPS Network Services or not?

If the question should be rephrased or extended, then:

There is any reason why in the validator & ATS there are no tests for WPS?

And/Or:

There is any reason why in the validator & ATS there are no tests for the harmonized SDSs (except for testing their metadata)?

According to https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/documents/position-paper-implementing-rules-inspire-services-allowing-spatial-data-services-be-0

However 5 years later in https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/id/document/tg/sds is mentioned:

Clarification request: INSPIRE themes for groundwater extraction

In the Netherlands the use of groundwater is to a large extent subject to licensing. As part of a license a requirement may be imposed to periodically report on the volume of extracted groundwater. Information on these matters has to be submitted for registration in the Key Registry on the Subsurface [NL: Basisregistratie Ondergrond, or BRO in short). Relevant datasets within the BRO are Groundwater Usage Facilities (GUF) and Groundwater Production Dossier (GPD].

As part of the standardization activities we will create mappings to relevant INSPIRE themes. At first we considered EF (Environmental Monitoring Facilities) and PF (Production and Industrial Facilities). But comparing the scope of these themes with those of the BRO we have second thoughts.

The scope of GUF and GPD is: Within the scope of the BRO domain [consisting of groundwater usage facilities and groundwater production dossiers] fall all types of groundwater usage that are subject to a license or reporting requirement within the scope of the Environment Law – groundwater extraction (irrespective of purpose or quantity) and groundwater based subsurface energy systems--. This includes groundwater extraction for purposes such as drinking water, fire extinguishing water, livestock drinking water, irrigation, process water, cooling water, drainage by well points, soil or groundwater decontamination or level controlled land drainage - using a pump-. [NL: Binnen de scope van dit BRO domein vallen alle vergunnings- of meldingsplichtige vormen van grondwatergebruik die vallen onder de Omgevingswet--onttrekkingen (ongeacht gebruiksdoel en of grootte) en bodemenergiesystemen--. Dit betreft o.a. onttrekkingen ten behoeve van drinkwater, bluswater, veedrenking, beregening, proceswater, koelwater, bronbemaling, bodem en of grondwatersanering en peilgestuurde drainage-met pomp-].

For the sake of comparison I here quote the EF and PF scope from their respective data specifications:
• EF: […] the focus is on environmental monitoring facilities as a linking element between spatial data themes as defined by the INSPIRE Directive and observations and measurements on specific aspects of the environment (e.g. air quality, atmospheric conditions, water quality).
• PF: features related to production and industry, as well as entities related to describing summary information about the activities taking place in production and industrial facilities, and the main environmental issues related to them (pollution prevention, waste management, risk). [...] Extraction of resources includes the following: non-energy extractive industry (mining of construction materials, industrial minerals, and metallic minerals), energy extractive industry, and water.

Therefore the following questions:

1. Should ground water extraction facilities for the purpose of drinking water be mapped to EF, or PF or neither?
2. Should ground water extraction facilities for other purpose as listed above for GUF and GPD be mapped to EF, or PF or neither?
3. Should production figures of extracted ground water for the purpose of drinking water be mapped to EF, or PF or neither?
4. Should production figures of extracted ground water for other purposes be mapped to EF, or PF or neither?
5. Are groundwater based subsurface energy systems within or outside the scope of EF and PF and also ER: Energy Resources?

Thank you very much in advance.

EVRF entries allowed CRS's

The current list of allowed CRS's contains EPSG:5730 (EVRF2000 height). The EPSG registry contains more recent realizations of EVRS: EPSG:5621 (EVRF2007 height) and EPSG:9389 (EVR2019 height). Those last two should probably be added to a future CRS registry too.

Query on the legalFoundationDocument attribute related to the spatial data theme Protected Sites

Would appreciate guidance on the approach to take in those instances when the legal act that created a specific Protected Site is repealed and replaced by a new legislative instrument.

GeophObject.distributionInfo is missing type definition

• a description of the steps to reproduce your issue
  According to the Implementing Rules (4.3.1.2), GeophObject.distributionInfo should have the type MD_Distributor. In the Geophysical-Core schema, no type for distributionInfo is defined.
  Same for the draft schema.

I think the xsd needs to be adapted.

Harmonization of air quality data (INSPIRE theme III/5 HH)

According to the INSPIRE data specifications, air quality data are part of the INSPIRE theme III/5 Human Health and Safety. As described in the D2.8.III.5 Data Specification on Human Health and Safety – Technical Guidelines document (e.g. pages 25 - 26) and in the INSPIRE feature catalogue, a raw measurement data should be stored in the EnvHealthDeterminantMeasure object and a statistical data resulting from aggregation of raw measurements in the EnvHealthDeterminantStatisticalData object.

To simplify the problem description, let's imagine the source spatial dataset (set of points or grid network) has following attributes:
pollutantSpecification
pollutantConcentration
pollutantUnitOfMeasure
pollutantTimeInformation (sampling date)
pollutantMedia (e.g. air)

Then, in the process of data harmonisation with the INSPIRE III/5 theme data structure, the source data attributes should be mapped as follows:
pollutantSpecification -> UomConcentration - component,
pollutantMedia -> UomConcentration - media,
pollutantUnitOfMeasure - UomConcentration - uom
pollutantConcentration -> EnvHealthDeterminantMeasure - measure,
pollutantTimeInformation -> EnvHealthDeterminantMeasure - measureTime

I use HALE>>studio for harmonisation of our data with INSPIRE and creation of harmonised GML files. Unfortunately, in this case I cannot find the way how to interlink the EnvHealthDeterminantMeasure and UomConcentration objects. Could somebody provide me any hint or sample of harmonised data?

Thank you very much
Miroslav Fanta
CENIA, Czech Environmental Information Agency

Application schema to use for the harmonization of the FD reporting data

During the process of the harmonization of the FD reporting data, we found that the reporting schema published by the EEA (http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/schemaset/Floods/view) does not seem to be Inspire compliant as it is not a formal specialization of the NaturalRiskZones application schema, e.g. the 'Identifier' data type in the reporting schema is not imported from the Inspire Base Types application schema.

Are there any suggestions about which application schema should be used to harmonize the FD reporting data?