13th meeting of the MIG technical sub-group¶
- 13th meeting of the MIG technical sub-group
- DRAFT Minutes
- Welcome and approval of the agenda
- Minutes of the previous meeting
- Annex I xml schema updates
- Draft Terms of Reference for MIG temporary sub-group on Persistent Identifier (PID)
- Status updates of sub-groups
- Planned webinar on national implementation in Spain and Sweden
Thursday, 27th of November 2014, 10:00-11:30 CET
Call for agenda items and presentations: #2246
- Welcome and approval of the agenda (Michael Lutz)
[10:00 – 10:10]
- Minutes of the previous meeting (for discussion and agreement) (Michael Lutz)
[10:10 - 10:20]
- review of open action items
- Annex I xml schema updates (Michael Lutz) [Slides: Annex_I_maintenance_approaches.pptx]
[10:20 - 10:40]
- Draft Terms of Reference for MIG temporary sub-group on Persistent Identifier (PID) #2288 (Christian Ansorge) [Slides: 20141127_MIWP-4a_Proposal.pptx]
[10:40 - 11:00]
- Status updates of sub-groups
[11:00 - 11:15]
- Status MIWP-14 and thematic clusters (Robert Tomas)
- Feedback from the Facilitators' virtual meeting
- How will MIG-T liaisons be kept informed?
- Status MIWP-8 sub-group (Michael Oestling)
- Dependancies in the MIWP-8 workplan
- How should other MIWP report issues and discussions to the MIWP-8 team?
- Status MIWP-5 sub-group (Carlo Cipolloni)
- Update NS+MD validation workshop (Michael Lutz)
- Status nominations and applications for MIWP-6 and MIWP-7a sub-groups (Michael Lutz)
- Status MIWP-14 and thematic clusters (Robert Tomas)
- Planned webinar on national implementation in Spain and Sweden (Emilio Lopez, Christina Wasstroem)
[11:15 - 11:20]
[11:20 - 11:30]
- MIG-T meeting at the INSPIRE conference / GWF
- Template for collecting good implementation examples
The minutes are based on the notes taken in the web-conference chat window by the scribe as well as comments made by participants in the chat.
Where “+1” is used in the minutes, this is to indicate support for the position of the previous speaker.
Actions are indicated in the minutes using the keyword [Action] and are summarised in the table below. This table includes also open actions from previous meetings (up until action 91). During the agenda point on the "Minutes of the previous meeting" it has been decided to close a number of old outstanding issues, which are no longer relevant or have been superseded by newer, more specific actions.
|26||Share relevant events with the group||all||continuous|
|41d||Open an issue on Redmine on ensuring that all metadata that should be harvested are actually harvested, to discuss if anything needs to be changed or added to the current harvesting procedure.||JRC||2014-04-30|
|41j||Send suggestions of good examples of web sites to Karen||#2244||All||2014-05-30|
|42||Investigate how openly accessible issue trackers can be made available (in Redmine?) for consulations and open discussions||#2163||JRC||2014-06-30|
|49||Share the engineering report with the MIG-T||OGC||2014-07-31|
|57||Inform MIG representatives when the OGC wiki page on INSPIRE goes live||JRC||when available|
|60||Propose good practices for INSPIRE end-to-end implementation||wiki page||all||continuous|
|61||Include a section in the MIWP on the standard tasks of the MIG-T and MIG-P, including the sharing of good practices||#2245||JRC||next MIWP version|
|63||Develop a proposal for simplifying Redmine and Redmine MIG instructions||#2231||JRC & EEA||2014-11-15|
|66||Prepare an overview of possible communication topics, audiences, channels and plans||EEA||2014-11-15|
|67||Update MIG flowchart in the ToR to reflect distinction of issues and actions||JRC||2014-10-31|
|68||Describe process for setting up MIG temporary sub-groups in some sort of guidance||JRC||2014-11-15|
|70||Develop instructions on how to use Redmine specifically for the work of the MIG and present these in a (recorded) web-conference||#2231||JRC & EEA||2014-11-30|
|71||Make suggestions for improvement or specific questions on how to do certain MIG tasks with Redmine||#2231||all||2014-10-31|
|72||Update the MIG ToR to allow also MIG members to participate in sub-groups||Michael||2014-10-31|
|75||Indicate possible dependencies with other actions in the MIWP-8 ToR/work plan||Michael Ö||2014-10-31|
|77||Send around more details on the format and the selection procedure for the INSPIRE Conference/GWF 2015||#2242||JRC||2014-10-15|
|85||Propose ToR for a subgroup around GML||Michael||2014-10-20|
|87||Provide translations of TG code list values||wiki page||all||2014-10-20|
|89||Share ARE3NA deliverables on Best practices on RDF and PIDs||ARE3NA D.TD.02 State of play (RDF & PIDs for INSPIRE)||JRC||2014-10-15||x|
|90||Share DK and NO Enterprise Architect models||DK model||Heidi, Arvid||2014-10-31|
|91||Draft ToR for MIWP-14 sub-group||Robert||2014-11-28|
|94||Write up the two options for Annex I schema updates||Michael||2014-12-12|
|95||Consult stakeholders about two scenarios for Annex I schema updates||all||2014-12-31|
|96||Further elaborate the MIWP-4a action description and sub-group ToR||#2292||Christian||2015-01-15|
|97||Describe issue about Service Monitoring of Member State endpoints being consumed by the geoportal in the issue tracker or at the next MIG-T meeting||Alex Ramage||2014-12-15|
|98||Investigate with the UK architecture board whether the UK can take the lead on MIWP-7b||Alex Ramage||2014-12-31|
Welcome and approval of the agenda¶
Alex Ramage asked to add the status of MIWP-7b to the agenda (under AOB). Otherwise, the agenda was approved as proposed.
Minutes of the previous meeting¶
Michael went through the current list of open issue issues. Christina proposed to close action 44 since this is covered by the discussion between JRC and Anja Hopfstock (ELF). Several countries reported that they are working on translations of TG code list values (action 87). Marc Leobet suggested that some values could also be translated by international organisations, e.g. WMO.
There were no further comments on the draft minutes.
Annex I xml schema updates¶
Michael presented two alternative approaches for dealing with the Annex I schema updates [Slides: Annex_I_maintenance_approaches.pptx]. The discussion on which of the two approaches to follow has been reopened due to the discussions on the schema updates with the ELF project.
Marc asked why in scenario 2 it was necessary to change the namespace and whether it wouldn't be better to keep the namespace "of reference" through time. Michael explained that changing the namespace is particularly important if changes are made in the schemas that are not backwards-compatible, because otherwise there would be two incompatible definitions of types in the same namespace.
Arvid, Marc and Alex said that there was was some confusion about the understanding of the term namespace. Michael clarified that the namespace is understood in the XML schema meaning of the term (see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML_namespace), i.e. the complete path (e.g. http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/schemas/ad/3.0 for v3.0 of the Addresses schema) rather than just http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/.
Christian asked whether in scenario 2 there would be any effects on the Annex II+III schemas that import some of the Annex I schemas. Michael confirmed that this is probably the case and that JRC would look into this. Christian then asked whether in scenario 2, the updated v4.0 schemas would import other INSPIRE schemas of different versions (3.0 or 4.0). Michael and Carlo agreed that this should be avoided.
Nathalie asked why in scenario 2 it was proposed to maintain and update two versions in parallel rather than going to version 4.0 as soon as possible. Marc replied that this was useful to give time to users to move from one tool's version to another, which could take years. +1 by Christina.
Most participants agreed that a decision for scenario 1 or 2 is not easy and might have far-reaching consequences. Therefore there should be sufficient time for a consultation with national stakeholders before taking a decision. Michael agreed, but also pointed out that the issue is pending for more than a year now and many implementers are waiting for the updated Annex I schemas.
Arvid supported option 2 since this would support the same code list referencing as Annex II and III. Michel said that also in the Netherlands option 2 is used for maintaining the Dutch schemas.
It was agreed that JRC would write up the two options and that the MIG-P would have time until end of 2014 to consult with their stakeholders. A decision would then be taken in January. [Action JRC and all]
Draft Terms of Reference for MIG temporary sub-group on Persistent Identifier (PID)¶
Christian presented the draft terms of reference for a sub-group and activity on persistent identifiers (PIDs) [Slides: 20141127_MIWP-4a_Proposal.pptx].
Lars asked whether the activity has to be first endorsed by MIG-P. Michael confirmed that it was agreed in the MIG-P meeting in September that this topic should be more clearly defined before being endorsed. In this context, it was proposed to split the topic into PIDs (MIWP-4a) and RDF/Linked Data (MIWP-4b). Christina agreed that it is important to describe why this activity is important, so that MIG-P know why it has to be endorsed. +1 by Robert, Marc, Alex and Carlo.
Robert asked what was identified as an obstacle by the EEA's stakeholders - to make identifiers persistent (managment issue) or the structure of the id?
The UK expressed their support for the presented ToR as they are and suggested to take them through the new process (being currently proposed by the MIG-P).
Arvid felt that the proposal has a too long time line before conclusion. Conclusions are needed sooner, and a 1/2 year work before reporting would be better. +1 by Christina, Robert and Alex.
Marc mentioned as a possible discussion point the meaning of "persistence" (is it years or a century... ?)
It was agreed that a small group (volunteers: Christian, Darja, Morten Borrebæk (NO), Carlo, Markus, plus someone from France and JRC TBD) should further elaborate the ToR and the description of the issues to be solved. [Action Christian et al.]
Status updates of sub-groups¶
MIWP-14 (Thematic clusters)¶
The thematic cluster facilitators had their 1st telecon 2 weeks ago. It was agreed that the official launch will be on 9 December 2014. Currently, the platform is being populated with initial content and tested by the facilitators. At launch, the platform content will of course not be complete, but focussed on discussion topics. If a discussion in a cluster is mature and includes a change proposal to existing TGs (or IRs), this change proposal will be first discussed in MIWP-14 sub-group. After discussion there it can be passed on to the MIG.
Darja asked whether thematic cluster facilitators will contact MIG liasions - this didn't happen yet. Christina said that MIG-T liaisons could also contact facilitators. Robert will remind the facilitators to make contact with their MIG-T liaisons.
The MIWP-8 sub-group kicked off on 17 November. During the kick-off it was discussed how to work on different issues in smaller teams. The sub-group is large with >30 members. Work will be documented in Redmine issue tracker and wiki. Currrently, an initial analysis of the issues (including dependencies and relationships to other issues) is taking place. More volunteers to lead smaller teams are needed. The next meeting will be on 4 December.
MIWP-5 (Validation and conformity testing)¶
The call for participation is closed. This is also a big group with >25 members. The kick-off meeting will take place on 12 December.
On 2-3 December, a workshop on validation of metadata and network services will take place. The results of this workshop will feed into the work of MIWP-5.
MIWP-6 (Registers and registries)¶
The call for participation are closed. The sub-group has 18 members. The kick-off meeting will take place on Monday, 15 December, 14:30-16:30 CET.
MIWP-7a (Download Services for observation data)¶
The call for participation are closed. The sub-group has 12 members. The kick-off meeting will take place on on Thursday, 11 December, 14:30-16:30 CET.
Planned webinar on national implementation in Spain and Sweden¶
On 11 December, from 10:30-12:00 CET, a webinar will be organised on the INSPIRE implementation in Spain and Sweden on Thursday (see connection details here). This will be the first in (hopefully) a series of webinars on how INSPIRE is being implemented in different countries. The presentations will focus on national coordination, challenges for implementation and success stories and opportunities.
MIG-T meeting at the INSPIRE/GWF conference 2015¶
It was agreed to organise a 1/2-day MIG-T meeting at the INSPIRE/GWF Conference 2015 on Friday, 29 May 2015.
Template for collecting good implementation examples¶
Service Monitoring of Member State endpoints being consumed by the geoportal¶
Alex raised an issue about Service Monitoring of Member State endpoints being consumed by the geoportal and how issues are reported back. This includes the process for contacting individual data providers and informing them about issues. He will explain the issue in more detail in the issue tracker or the next MIG-T meeting. [Action Alex]
Next MIG-T meeting¶
Since the next virtual meeting would fall on Christmas day, it was agreed to have the next meeting on Thursday, 18/12 10:30-12:00 CET.
Status MIWP-7b (WCS)¶
Alex Ramage enquired about the status of refining action MIWP-7b (Extension of Download Service TG for coverage data). Michael said that, currently, there is no capacity in the JRC to move this forward quickly. Alex Ramage said, he would discuss the in the UK architecture board and see if the UK can take a lead on this action. [Action Alex]