Meeting #2 of MIG sub-group 2017.4

Thursday, 15 February 2018, 15:00-16:30 CET

Connection details:

Recording:  Streaming, Download


[15:00-15:10] Welcome, approval of the agenda & minutes of the previous meeting (Michael Lutz)

[15:10-16:15] Open GitHub issues for discussion

[16:15-16:30] AOB



The minutes summarise the main conclusions and actions from the meeting. Actions are indicated in the minutes using the keyword [Action] and tracked in the issue tracker.


Litka, Anja (DE), Angelo Quaglia (JRC), Teemu Saloriutta (FI), Francisco Caldeira (PT), Thijs Brentjens (NL), Vasile Crăciunescu (RO), Alejandra Sanchez and Laura ?? (ES), Michael Lutz (JRC), Marcus Sen (UK), Martin Tuchyna (SK), Lars-Inge Arnevik (NO), Veronika Kusova (CZ), Antonio Rotundo (IT), Heidi Vanparys (DK), Carlo Cipolloni (IT)

Welcome, approval of the agenda & minutes of the previous meeting

Michael Lutz welcomed the new sub-group members that joined since the kick-off meeting (Martin Tuchyna and Heidi Vanparys). The group will also be supported by Angelo Quaglia from JRC.

The agenda and the minutes of the previous meeting were approved without changes.

Open GitHub issues for discussion

Issues discussed:

The group agreed on the following points:

  • The conclusions for each discussed issue will be summarised after the meeting directly in Github using "[2017.4 meeting YYYY-mm-dd]" in the comment to indicate that the post is not a personal opinion, but a summary of the discussion and conclusions
  • [Action] JRC to investigate with ETF developers whether tests could distinguish between requirements and recommendations, which should result in errors and warnings, respectively.
  • The validator used in the INSPIRE geoportal should be consistent with the ETF validator. [Action] JRC to send out a clear communication on the relationship between the two validators and a roadmap on the integration of the ETF validator in the geoportal.


  • The joint 2017.4 meeting with the ETF contractors will take place on Friday, 16/3.
  • The ATS and ETS should be consistent with the requirements in the TG as much as possible. Therefore, if it is decided that a given test is correct (and consistent with the intentions of the TG), but not backed by a concrete requirement, a corrigendum should be published. For v1.3 of the Metadata TG, such a corrigendum should be consistent with the solution chosen in v2.0.1 of the TG.
  • Inconsistencies between both validators should be discussed only in the Github issue tracker, using the tag "geoportal-ets-inconsistency". [Action] JRC to transfer inconsistency issues from the geoportal helpdesk to the Github issue tracker.