Support #3767

feedback indicators

Added by Benoît Fricheteau 11 months ago. Updated 11 months ago.

Status:AssignedStart date:28 Nov 2019
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:Vlado Cetl% Done:


Category:Monitoring indicators
Target version:-
Submitting Organisation: Knowledge-Base relevant?:No
Proactive:No Keyword #1:
Country: Keyword #2:
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 ( or any link to European Official Journal.







#1 Updated by Daniele Francioli 11 months ago

  • Status changed from New to Assigned
  • Assignee set to Vlado Cetl

#2 Updated by Vlado Cetl 11 months ago

  • Category set to Monitoring indicators

Dear Benoît,

in the TG Metadata 2.0[1] 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
the specification

Best regards



#3 Updated by Benoît Fricheteau 11 months ago

Dear Vlado,



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.



Also available in: Atom PDF