Since the knowledge and experience in working with quality reports differs among countries this could be beneficial.
Currently organizations are now looking into using ISO191157 for quality reporting.
ISO19157 is also referenced in current data specifications.
The group should review if and how to handle the new ISO191157 within the TG.
- Baseline existing practice with implementation of 191157 to justify that a requirement amongst data producers exists?
- Are there sections in ISO191157 that could be beneficial for TG Metadata or is the current ISO19115/ISO19139 enough for quality reports?
- Do the new ISO19115-3 include transformations to convert quality reports from ISO19115-3/ISO19157-2 to ISO19139 so that organizations that have migrated to ISO19157 still can deliver metadata according to current Inspire TG Metadata. ?
Issues in using ISO 19157 in dataspecification¶
This issue is not (initially anyhow) about how to include the ISO 19157 quality-reporting into TG-Metadata.
The main task is to identify how we handle the already inserted references to ISO19157 in dataspecifications.
The later versions of dataspecfications e.g.
D2.8.I.9 Data Specification on Protected SitesProtected Sites –Technical Guidelines version 3.2 - 2014-04-17
Have two chapters that refeer to ISO 19157 in the guidelines on how to report quality
188.8.131.52. Guidelines for reporting quantitative results of the data quality evaluation
184.108.40.206. Guidelines for reporting descriptive results of the Data Quality evaluation
Our current TG Metadata is based on ISO 19115 and ISO 19139
To report metadata using ISO 19157 would (as I understand it) require us to handle
metadata in ISO19115-1 and its XML-schema ISO19115-3
All quality reports (even the one we today handle, like conformance) should then be handled with ISO 19157 and its xml-schema ISO 19157-3.
We need a description on how this is planned to be handled.
Even if the metadata in dataspecifications are optional and not included in TG Metadata I don't see how we can
mix qualityreports using ISO 19115 with qualityresports in ISO 191157 in same record.
It would be good to hear how the editors of dataspecifications have designed this.
Maybe there is an idea on some kind of extention of ISO191139 for this.
This ticket is closely related to Issue F that will manage the relation to the new upcoming standards for metadata and quality.
See also in ticket F a brief description of the standards involved in the discussions.