|Status:||Assigned||Start date:||28 Nov 2019|
|Assignee:||Vlado Cetl||% Done:|
|Submitting Organisation:||Knowledge-Base relevant?:||No|
|Originating UI:||Keyword #3:|
I am quite sceptical about the way you calculate NSi4 indicators. To do so, you only use, as fare I noticed it, self compliance declaration in metadata regards to EC Regulation 976/2008. You check it with the textual value.
I think it's really dangerous and unstable to use such a way of working. You should rather based identification of declaration on an URI like this one (https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/2162d6db-a298-4c46-a7a6-cda44fd16628/language-en) or any link to European Official Journal.
#2 Updated by Vlado Cetl 11 months ago
- Category set to Monitoring indicators
in the TG Metadata 2.0 regarding conformity it is specified how the conformity shall/should be declared. e.g. the xlink:href attribute of the gmx:Anchor element should be used for referring to the URI of
#3 Updated by Benoît Fricheteau 11 months ago
I wasn't speaking at all about content of Technical Guidelines and their specification. I was speaking about the way you check if a service is complaint or not. De facto, you check if there is textual reference to the EC Regulation 976/2008. It means the way of checking is quite unstable : it's case sensitive, you have to maintain all the langages, and so on. I suggest yiou to ckeck URI.