Re: GeoNetwork-users Digest, Vol 1, Issue 92

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GeoNetwork-users Digest, Vol 1, Issue 92

Bruce Westcott

Jeroen et al.:

 

The difficulties importing ESRI_ISO.XML (or any other XML which purports ISO compliance) has to do with two larger issues, I think:

 

1)    How "flexible" is the XML import/parsing process in GeoNetwork, and how can it be made as tolerant as possible for importing XML files which are "kind of" ISO-19139-ish?  (Sub-issues: how will the parse/import process deal with different classes of "problems" such as missing elements, extended elements, schema differences, mismatched data types, etc.???)

 

2)    What version of ISO-19139 will be incorporated into GeoNetwork, and how easy will it be for users to upgrade/modify that version?  Will GeoNetwork contain and rely on the entire schema, which can then be altered, or will there be complex logic that interprets the schema (and therefore would have to be modified and tested when the schema changes)?

 

There is an unofficial version of the ISO-19139-TS schema posted on the web; as I understand things, it is the version forwarded to the 22nd plenary meeting of ISO/TC 211 held in Orlando, FL (US) in May.  ISO-19139 was scheduled for discussion at the meeting, but there were substantial comments/objections documented by several countries during the DTS review period.  

 

I have not heard results of the May meeting, but I expect that there is still some work to be done to gain consensus.  Bottom line -- my best guess here -- a truly "final" TS version of ISO-19139 is in gestation NOW (following the May meeting), will emerge from ISO sometime in coming months, and may take some time from that point to stabilize.  (Don't forget the corrigenda: certain some problems will be noted as people go to work implementing applications.) 

 

So if ISO-19139 is truly the Holy Grail of interoperable, exchangeable metadata, how long will it take all users to stabilize on a "final" version, and to modify their applications to include import/export functions that are somewhat forgiving?

 

 

Bruce Westcott

Geospatial Metadata Consultant

Marshfield, Vermont 05658 -- USA

802.426.3344

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Message: 1

Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:31:17 +0200

From: Jeroen Ticheler <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [GeoNetwork-users] compatibility with arc catalog

To: Carl Anderson <[hidden email]>

Cc: Ursula Hoernes <[hidden email]>,

      [hidden email]

Message-ID: <[hidden email]>

Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII

 

Thanks Carl!

Can this be written up slightly more structured so I can include in 

in the Community website for people to refer to?

Note that in GeoNetwork 2.1 metadata will be validated against 

ISO19139. We expect that to be ready as a release around September 

this year.

Have a good weekend,

Jeroen

 

On Jun 2, 2006, at 4:53 AM, Carl Anderson wrote:

 

> We ran into a similar issue when importing both FGDC-std conforming 

> metadata and ArcCatalog metadata.

> 

> depending on the import method if the file starts with

> <? xml  .... ?>

> <metadata>

> 

> The error Ursula saw occurs.

> 

> If you manually edit the file stripping the <?xml ... ?>  comment

> the import works fine.

> 

> Note that the <?xml ... ?>  comment is NOT stored in the database 

> and is added by the stylesheets when editing or reviewing.

> 

> Once imported geonetwork mostly ignores the xml tags it does not 

> understand.

> Of course Arc Catalog metadata is an extension to fgdc-std (CSDGM 

> v2.0) metadata and the extensions are not always honored.

> 

> Instead of  converting

> 

> Arc Catalog ->  fgdc-std (CSDGM v2.0) -> ISO 19115 -> ISO 19139 

> (CSDGM v3.0?)

> 

> 

> Locally we are working on stylesheets for

> 

> Arc Catalog -> ISO 19139 ( CSDGM v3.0?)

> and

> CSDGM V2.0 -> ISO 19139 ( CSDGM v3.0?)

> 

> 

> we do note that

> ISO19139 is not yet official,  it appears to be at the DIS stage.

> US FGDC is expected to adopt ISO19139 as  CSDGM v3.0.

> 

> C.

> 

> Carl Anderson

> GIS Manager

> Fulton County, Georgia, USA

>*********************************************

[BW] STUFF DELETED

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GeoNetwork-users Digest, Vol 1, Issue 92

Jeroen Ticheler-3
Hi Bruce,

On Jun 5, 2006, at 10:51 PM, Bruce Westcott wrote:

Jeroen et al.:

 

The difficulties importing ESRI_ISO.XML (or any other XML which purports ISO compliance) has to do with two larger issues, I think:

 

1)    How "flexible" is the XML import/parsing process in GeoNetwork, and how can it be made as tolerant as possible for importing XML files which are "kind of" ISO-19139-ish?  (Sub-issues: how will the parse/import process deal with different classes of "problems" such as missing elements, extended elements, schema differences, mismatched data types, etc.???)

The import process is flexible in the sense that you can add XSL files to convert an incoming XML format into one that will validate against the schemas as used by GeoNetwork. In version 2.0 these are FGDC, ISO19115 DIS and Dublin Core. In version 2.1 we have added the ISO19139 schemas. 

 

2)    What version of ISO-19139 will be incorporated into GeoNetwork, and how easy will it be for users to upgrade/modify that version?  Will GeoNetwork contain and rely on the entire schema, which can then be altered, or will there be complex logic that interprets the schema (and therefore would have to be modified and tested when the schema changes)?

We have used the latest version as available from the site http://eden.ign.fr/xsd/isotc211/index_html?set_language=en&cl=en
We will for sure need to update these while updates come out :-( But release 2.1 is planned for release only by the end of September, so there is more time to update things in the mean time.
We have created a migration application to migrate from one version of GeoNetwork to the next. This will convert all metadata in the catalog through an XSL transformation and report issues it encounters in that process (you can just do a test run first :-) ). We have had that migration procedure from version 1 to version 2 and now there's one that will migrate the ISO19115 DIS to ISO19115:2003 validated against the 19139 schema.
It's not very difficult to add other versions of schema's to the application (not very quick either as it involves adding and updating of a range of XSL stylesheets.

 

There is an unofficial version of the ISO-19139-TS schema posted on the web; as I understand things, it is the version forwarded to the 22nd plenary meeting of ISO/TC 211 held in Orlando, FL (US) in May.  ISO-19139 was scheduled for discussion at the meeting, but there were substantial comments/objections documented by several countries during the DTS review period.  

Yes, everyone is desperately waiting for a final version, and so do we :-( However, using some key releases and providing a migration path should facilitate this transition phase.

 

I have not heard results of the May meeting, but I expect that there is still some work to be done to gain consensus.  Bottom line -- my best guess here -- a truly "final" TS version of ISO-19139 is in gestation NOW (following the May meeting), will emerge from ISO sometime in coming months, and may take some time from that point to stabilize.  (Don't forget the corrigenda: certain some problems will be noted as people go to work implementing applications.) 

 

So if ISO-19139 is truly the Holy Grail of interoperable, exchangeable metadata, how long will it take all users to stabilize on a "final" version, and to modify their applications to include import/export functions that are somewhat forgiving?

Who knows. I hope the CSW 2 and ISO19115 profile will help a little in that respect to provide one of those intermediate solutions while stabilizing.

Greetings,
Jeroen

 

 

Bruce Westcott

Geospatial Metadata Consultant

Marshfield, Vermont 05658 -- USA

802.426.3344