Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[design] clarify jrc needs #21

Open
pvgenuchten opened this issue Jan 23, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

[design] clarify jrc needs #21

pvgenuchten opened this issue Jan 23, 2025 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@pvgenuchten
Copy link
Contributor

For me these 2 lines are not clear, what is expected here:

- adopt the ISO 19157 data quality measures
- JRC does not want to discourage data providers from publishing metadata by visualizing, that they are not conformant with a set of rules

@Tomas-Pavelka
Copy link

Line 52 - adopt the ISO 19157 data quality measures

  • ISO 19157 (Geographic information — Data quality) is, technically, usually natively implemented in the validation tools. The measures from ISO 19157 describe, e.g. Completeness Commission/Omission (are all mandatory metadata elements present?, % of missing elements, etc.), or domain consistency (i.e. does the text string have the form/values/text as expected?).
  • ISO 19115 is adopting the Data Quality classes from ISO 19157. This fact alone fulfils the requirement.
  • In other words, the validation results can be later reported in line with the 19157, but at this point, this requirement doesn't affect the validation process.

Line 53 - JRC does not want to discourage data providers from publishing metadata by visualizing, that they are not conformant with a set of rules

  • This relates to the discussions that the Validation results (especially from the INSPIRE validation) should not be publicly visualised in the catalogue. At least not the non-conformant results...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants