17th meeting of the MIG permanent technical sub-group (MIG-T)¶
- 17th meeting of the MIG permanent technical sub-group (MIG-T)
- FINAL Minutes
- Welcome and approval of the agenda
- Minutes of the previous meeting
- Report on meeting of Thematic Clusters facilitators
- Extensions of INSPIRE data specifications
- Status reports and discussion points MIWP-6
- Status reports and discussion points MIWP-7a
- Status reports and discussion points MIWP-8
- Status reports and discussion points MIWP-16
- Status reports and discussion points MIWP-5
- Discussion: Funding of operational services (output of MIWP-16, MIWP-5...)
- Risk management (lack of funding, cross-dependencies between work packages...)
- Discussions on the interim outcomes of the communication analysis
- Table Join Service
- Application for MIWP-1: Making the INSPIRE data specifications more readable
- INSPIRE 360° demo
- How to progress with proposed MIWP actions
- Discussion on the usability of INSPIRE data and services
- APIs for INSPIRE
- Round-table about plans for implementing the SDS IRs
- Conclusions and next steps
Wednesday-Thursday, 11-12 March 2015
Real Observatorio de Madrid
3 Alfonso XII Street
Call for agenda items and presentations: #2321
Please note that on Tuersday, 10 March, from 10:00 - 18:00, the Meeting of the Facilitators of the INSPIRE Thematic Clusters will also take place at the Real Observatorio de Madrid, 3 Alfonso XII Street, 28014 Madrid. This meeting will be open also to the MIG-T liaisons to the Thematic Clusters, but no additional daily allowances or hotel nights will be remibursed.
Wednesday, 11 March
Welcome and approval of the agenda (Michael Lutz)
Minutes of the previous meeting (for discussion and agreement) (Michael Lutz)
Report on meeting of Thematic Clusters facilitators (Robert Tomas and TC Facilitators)
- MIWP-14 sub-group
- Overall feedback from the meeting
- Reports of main issues from individual clusters
Coffee break [10:30-11:00]
Extensions of INSPIRE data specifications - Experiences from EEA, ELF, eENVplus (Darja Lihteneger, Heidi Vanparys, Carlo Cipolloni)
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-6 (Michael Lutz)
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-7a (Michael Lutz)
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-8 (TBD)
Lunch break [13:00-14:00]
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-16 (Paul Hasenohr)
- prototype of the monitoring dashboard
- future developments
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-5 (Carlo Cipolloni)
- Web-conference to CITE SC meeting at OGC TC meeting?
Discussion: Funding of operational services (output of MIWP-16, MIWP-5...) (Paul Hasenohr)
Coffee break [15:30-16:00]
Risk management (lack of funding, cross-dependencies between work packages...) (Paul Hasenohr)
Discussions on the interim outcomes of the communication analysis (Christian Ansorge)
Thursday, 12 March
Table Join Service (Michel Grothe)
Application for MIWP-1: Making the INSPIRE data specifications more readable (Robert Tomas)
INSPIRE 360' demo (Robert Tomas)
Coffee break [10:30-11:00]
How to progress with proposed MIWP actions
- MIWP-7b on WCS-based download services (TBD)
- MIWP-3 on access control (Michael Lutz)
- MIWP-4a on PIDs (Christian Ansorge)
- MIWP-4b on RDF & INSPIRE (Michael Lutz)
Discussion on the usability of INSPIRE data and services (Michael Lutz)
Observations of MS GN data and services: INSPIRE_geographical_names_sources_assessment.xlsx]
- Gazetteer use case
- INSPIRE services different from "national" services
Lunch break [13:30-14:30]
APIs for INSPIRE (Joeri Robrecht and Emilio Lopez)
Round-table about plans for implementing the SDS IRs (Christina Wasstroem)
Conclusions and next steps
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 tracked in the issue tracker. The currently open issues (including open issues from previous meetings) are summarised in the table below.
Welcome and approval of the agenda¶
It was agreed to discuss the SDS topic already on day 1. Since Paul Hasenohr couldn't attend the meeting due to illness, the agenda items to be presented by him were postponed to the next meeting. Otherwise the agenda was approved as proposed on the wiki.
Minutes of the previous meeting¶
Participants were invited to send comment on the minutes of the previous meeting by e-mail or to directly make modifications on the wiki.
The list of open action items was discussed to decide which of them are still relevant. The table below summarises how to proceeed with the open actions.
|No.||Action||Status||How to proceeed|
|26||Share relevant events with the group||ongoing||close and make regular point in meeting agenda|
|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.||open||JRC to open issue on Geoportal issue tracker|
|41j||Send suggestions of good examples of web sites to Karen||open||keep open|
|42||Investigate how openly accessible issue trackers can be made available (in Redmine?) for consulations and open discussions||open||close|
|49||Share the engineering report with the MIG-T||open||close when available|
|57||Inform MIG representatives when the OGC wiki page on INSPIRE goes live||open||check with OGC if this is till planned|
|60||Propose good practices for INSPIRE end-to-end implementation||ongoing||keep open; add ES examples on wiki|
|61||Include a section in the MIWP on the standard tasks of the MIG-T and MIG-P, including the sharing of good practices||open||keep open|
|63||Develop a proposal for simplifying Redmine and Redmine MIG instructions||open||organise meeting with MIWP action leads to discuss common approach|
|66||Prepare an overview of possible communication topics, audiences, channels and plans||ongoing||keep open|
|68||Describe process for setting up MIG temporary sub-groups in some sort of guidance||open||covered by new MIG workflow; close|
|70||Develop instructions on how to use Redmine specifically for the work of the MIG and present these in a (recorded) web-conference||open||see 63|
|71||Make suggestions for improvement or specific questions on how to do certain MIG tasks with Redmine||open||keep open|
|72||Update the MIG ToR to allow also MIG members to participate in sub-groups||open||This is included in the updated ToR; close|
|85||Propose ToR for a subgroup around GML||open||keep open|
|87||Provide translations of TG code list values||ongoing||keep open|
|90||Share DK and NO Enterprise Architect models||closed (DK); open (NO)||keep open (NO)|
|91||Draft ToR for MIWP-14 sub-group||open||close|
|96||Further elaborate the MIWP-4a action description and sub-group ToR||ongoing||keep open|
|99||Provide a short status update from all active MIWPs before each MIG-T meeting||ongoing||close and make regular point in meeting invitation|
|100||Add the SDS implementation deadlines to the INSPIRE roadmap||open||close|
Report on meeting of Thematic Clusters facilitators¶
Robert presented the thematic clusters (TC) platform (https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/), the main outcomes of the meeting of the TC facilitators the previous day and the terms of reference of the proposed MIWP-14 sub-group. [Slides: Thematic_clusters_summary_Madrid_MIG-T_rt_fin.pptx]
The TC facilitators then presented the current status and main discussion issues from their clusters. The following discussion points and suggestions were raised:
- Biodiversity cluster (Brian MacSharry) [Slides: TC_Biodiversity.pptx]]
- How to integrate also data on cultural heritage and archaeological protected sites into the PS theme?
- Focus not only on PS, but also on HB, SD and AM. Recruit experts from the relevant communities to the cluster.
- Topographic reference data (Anja Hopfstock) [Slides: TC_Topographic+Cadastral_Reference_data.pptx]]
- Size of GML documents, e.g. in Scotland 3000 TN features yield a 15 MB GML document. Files can be even bigger if the geometries are very detailed. [Action] Elaborate the issue and move it into the cross-cutting cluster and discuss it there [#2361].
- Statistical Cluster (Miroslaw Migacz) [Slides: TC_Statistical_SU_PD_HH.pptx]
- SU – IR limits pan-european grid usage to the grid defined in GG theme, while there’s an extended grid package defined in SU (simple issue)
- PD – room for improvement in the DS – one more featureType needed for the data to be more usable (complex issue, needs more discussion)
- also size of GML documents is an issue with PD - for total population count in units lower than LAU2 level (census areas) Poland had to create one GML for each LAU2 unit for the files to be of reasonable size (<10MB) - that results in over 2500 GMLs.
- Elevation, Orthoimagery, Reference systems and Geographical grids cluster (Jordi Escriu) [Slides: TC_EL-OI-GG-RS.pptx]
- Coverages - Misalignments between coverages produced by different data providers (interoperability issue).
- Coverages - Need to support to MS to perform the encoding / transformation to INSPIRE GML COV (existing S/W tools).
- Coverages - Use gml:boundedBy to encode Domain extent.
- EL - Correct use of the OGC SWE Quantity constraint in the TG; Ask OGC to clarify the use of this constraint in SWE standard (contradictions in the document).
- CRS - Need for an official European CRS - Use the future ISO CRS Registry?
- GG - Clarify the purpose / use of INSPIRE Grids is the TG.
- GG - Need to test if the 'Zoned Geographic Grid' is fit for purpose and implementable.
- Facilities, Utilities and Public Services Cluster (Angel López): [Slides: attachment:TC_Facilities_PF_AF_US.pptx]
- PF - Activity Complex: Follow and promote running innitiatives around PRTR and IED.
- Complexity of SDI Concepts, Legislation, Implementing Rules and Technical Guidelines for communities out of the core of SDIs and INSPIRE: Actions for simplification and explanation.
- Earth Science cluster (Tim Duffy) [Slides: GS-SO-NZ-MR-ER.pptx]:
- Cross-cutting: Layer naming issues
- Cross-cutting: LInking INSPIRE Earth Science (not only) data with European Research Area, Research Infrastructures (e.g. EPOS)
- Federation of code lists registers GE-SO-MR
- Land Cover and Land Use cluster (Lena Hallin-Pihlatie) [Slides: TC_LC-LU.pptx]
- LC - Unclarities on how to use and amend layer names
- LU - A proposal for changes to the HILUCS code list is under preparation in the LCLU community
Extensions of INSPIRE data specifications¶
Heidi Vanparys, Darja Lihteneger and Carlo Cipolloni presented experiences from the ELF project [Slides: INSPIRE_extensions_ELF.pptx], EEA [Slides: attachment:file] and eENVplus project [Slides: attachment: eENVplus_DS_Extension.pdf].
- How to integrate data with extensions and data without extensions?
- How can clients deal with different schemas?
- Many countries use national schemas and INSPIRE schemas rather than extending INSPIRE schemas. There are also differences between different organisations in the same country.
- If all ELF extensions are optional, isn't the statement "data is ELF-compliant" meaningless?
- A Best Practice on extensions should include guidelines on how clients should handle extensions.
- Extensions can be national, thematic or related to a specific legislation
- Do we need INSPIRE guidelines for extensions?
- Robert: Aren't the purposes too different to come to common guidelines?
- Marc: A methodology is needed for doing national extensions. Thus, step by step, we can build a richer SDI that is still interoperable
- Arvid: How are different SDIs working together? Look at extensions for reporting obligations.
- Jiri Polacek: Be very careful with extensions. But will be possible to provide ELF extensions that are INSPIRE-compliant? It should not be a problem for clients to deal with the extensions.
- Hugo: Solid guidelines for extensions could help overcome the fragmentation of INSPIRE in regional, local SDIs.
- Alex Ramage: Suggestion to use e-reporting as a testbed for doing extensions
- Hugo: this is relevant for other domains as well, e.g. broadband mapping
- Heidi: there is a link to the work of the ISO/TC 211 ad-hoc group on Best Practices for UML modelling
- It was agreed to collect existing guidelines on extensions
- It was proposed to organise a workshop following on from UML modelling workshop
- The discussion about extensions helps to understand contextual information - why was it done like this?
- It was agreed not to propose this as a new MIWP action at the moment.
- It was proposed to outsource the task of collecting good practices and making recommendations for extensions. Hugo suggested that ISA could be a possible funding source for this. [Action] JRC to investigate [#2364].
- Emilio suggested that, if this it outsourced, the task could be combined with the flattening discussion.
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-6¶
Michael Lutz presented the current status and work plan for the sub-group on registers and registries [Slides: MIWP-6_Status_update.pptx]. The main activities in the coming months wll be around refining the use cases and setting up the test-bed. The set-up of testbed nodes in Germany and the UK may be delayed, so it may be an option to start the testbed with setting up the register of registers at the JRC and adding testbed nodes as they become available. Further testbed partners are welcome.
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-7a¶
Michael Lutz presented the current status and work plan for the sub-group on SOS-based download services [Slides: MIWP-7a_Status_update.pptx]. The MIG workflow recently updated by the MIG-P will be used for having the proposed Download service TGs adopted. It was agreed to have the proposed SOS update reviewed by the MIG-T and MIG-P as soon as possible.
In the discussion, the issue was raised that also other MIWP actions will propose changes to the download service TGs - at least MIWP-5 (ATS for download services TGs) and the proposed MIWP-7b (WCS). It was agreed to draft a release plan (similar to the one done in MIWP-8) illustrating when different releases are planned and what they will contain. [Action Alex Kotsev, Carlo Cipolloni and Jari Reini/Jukka Rahkonen] [#2365]
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-8¶
Marc Leobet presented (on behalf of Michael Östling) the current status and work plan for the sub-group on updating the metadata TGs [Slides: MIWG-8 Update TG Metadata_StatusReport_2015-03-10.ppt].
Michel Grothe raised the question whether the work in MIWP-8 will also lead to updates of the IRs. Marc clarified that there are currently no discussions about this in the group, but some members of the group think that TGs can flexibly interpret the IRs. Michael and Hugo clarified that the TGs cannot contradict the IRs. Marc stressed that the most important aspect of any proposed changes (irrespective of whether it is a change to TGs or IRs) is the impact (i.e. costs) for implementers for changing existing systems and data.
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-16¶
Alex Ramage presented (on behalf of Paul Hasenohr) the current status and work plan for the sub-group on monitoring information [Slides: MIG-T_MIWP-16_status_20150311.pptx]. A prototype for the developed dashboard will be made available at https://inspire-dashboard.eea.europa.eu/dashboard soon.
One of the main questions currently discussed in the group is who will provide funding for making prototype tools operational and sustain them in the future. Is this a task for the MIG? It was agreed that this will be discussed in one of the next MIG-T and/or MIG-P meetings.
Of the present Member States, only the Netherlands and possibly Italy and Portugal will be using the dashboard for their annual reporting. Michel Grothe presented the first experiences and benefits with monitoring by the Dashboard [Slides: attachment: Benefits Monitoring by Dashboard NL]
It was clarified that dashboard can provide input to official annual reporting, but it is not equal to the official reports.
It was suggested to provide all official monitoring reports for the previous years through the dashboard. [Action] EEA to investigate whether this is feasible [#2366].
Status reports and discussion points MIWP-5¶
Carlo Cipolloni presented the current status and work plan for the sub-group on validation and conformity testing [Slides: attachment: MIWP- 5_Status_Update.pptx].
A question was raised who will provide the authoritative tool for compliance testing. It was clarified that the first step is to agree on common tests. Then these can be implemented either in one central tool or also in several tools at European and MS level. If there are different implementations, there, however, needs to be a way to certify the test engines against some kind of reference implementation. The design of such a procedure is one of the tasks to be worked on in MIWP-5.
Discussion: Funding of operational services (output of MIWP-16, MIWP-5...)¶
This topic was postponed to the next meeting.
Risk management (lack of funding, cross-dependencies between work packages...)¶
This topic was postponed to the next meeting.
Discussions on the interim outcomes of the communication analysis¶
Christian Ansorge presented the EEA's work on a framework for INSPIRE communication [Slides: Comm_INSPIRE_madrid_v0.pptx].
It was suggested that discussions on communication should not start on a "green field", but to start with concrete issues that MS and the EC have around INSPIRE implementation. The EEA are planning to launch a small survey/questionnaire to collect such concrete issues. [Action Christian Ansorge]
Table Join Service¶
Michel Grothe presented Geonovum's work on using to OGC table join service (TJS) for publishing statistical data (e.g. health statistics from Eurostat) [Slides: attachment: TJS & health statistics].
It is possible to write the data resulting from the join (permanently) to a data store, which can then be accessed through WFS or WMS.
One of the issues encountered is that TJS only supports tabular data in the GDAS format. Geonovum is planning to propose to OGC to also work with other formats, e.g. CSV, SDMX. Geonovum has developed an transformation tool for conversion from SDMX/CSV/Odata to GDAS. It is planned to integrate this tool into the Geoserver TJS.
Other issues are a lack of implementations (only 2 operational implementations and no OGC reference implementation, no client implementations).
[Action] Michel and Miroslav to share the TJS examples with the Statistics cluster [#2367].
It was discussed whether TJS should be added as an additional option for INSPIRE download services. Joeri suggested that we should also investigate other solutions, e.g. solutions that support data mining as well, e.g. Linked (open) data (e.g. based on the data cube vocabulary, http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/) or the Linked Data Platform (http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/). Emilio agreed that it might be more useful to use standards that are commonly used in the statistical domain (e.g. the SDMX REST API developed by Eurostat).
Christian suggested that a TJS could be seen as just a specific version of a Web Processing Service (WPS). Michael suggested that it could be seen as a transformation network service or an SDS. Marc suggested that it could also be used as a view service (to visualise statistical data).
It was agreed that the first step for deciding whether/how to develop TGs for TJS the fist step is to draft a mapping from Network services IRs (download, view, transformation) to TJS operations and concepts. [Action Michel (with support from JRC)] [#2368]
Application for MIWP-1: Making the INSPIRE data specifications more readable¶
Robert Tomas presented two applications developed by the JRC to support INSPIRE data providers with implementing INSPIRE data specifications [Slides: INSPIRE_Interactive_Data_Specifications.pptx]:
- The application "Data Specifications" facilitates the reading of INSPIRE Data Specification – Technical Guidelines documents by enabling to study only selected parts of the INSPIRE technical documentation. Furthermore the selected parts can be compared with the same parts from up to 3 data themes.
- The application "Find your scope" supports data providers with identification of the INSPIRE spatial data themes and spatial object types that are relevant to the dataset(s) they administer. This application is foreseen to be useful especially in situations when datasets fall under two or more INSPIRE data themes / application schemas content (i.g. most of the cases).
This activity is linked to action MIWP-1: Improve accessibility and readability of TG. The applications are available for testing at http://inspire-regadmin.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dataspecification/. Feedback is welcome. It should be noted that not all data themes are available in the "Data Specifications" application yet. The remaining specifications will be added in the coming weeks.
INSPIRE 360° demo¶
Robert Tomas presented an idea for developing a 360° demo for a small geographical area that can be used to showcase a complete INSPIRE implementation [Slides: Inspire_360demo_rt_MIG-T.pptx].
Carlo Cipolloni (?) suggested that some on-going European projects (e.g. eENVplus) are already developing something similar. Hugo de Groof suggested that such an application should be based on a concrete use case / application area, e.g. flood mapping, which would require the availability of data from many of the INSPIRE themes.
How to progress with proposed MIWP actions¶
MIWP-7b on WCS-based download services¶
Alex Ramage and Michael Lutz presented the current draft of the updated description of action MIWP-7b jointly developed by the UK and JRC [Action_description_MIWP-07b_ML.docx]. The main proposed activities are:
- to add a section on WCS to the download services TGs,
- to establish a testbed (testing the feasibility of the INSPIRE WCS extensions, serving INSPIRE-compliant coverage data through WCS and client-server interoperability), and
- to update or create new guidelines on coverage encoding
Jari Reini announced that the National Land Survey of Finland (Jukka Rahkonen) volunteers to lead this work package. [Action] A small preparatory team (Alex Ramage, Tim Duffy, Jari Reini, Jukka Rahkonen, Michael Lutz and Peter Baumann) to work on finalising the action description, the MIG-P prioritisation schema and the ToR for the MIWP-7b sub-group [#2369]. These will then submitted in parallel to MIG-T and MIG-P for comments, and subsequently to MIG-P for endorsement (by written procedure).
MIWP-3 on access control¶
Michael Lutz presented the outcomes of the ARE3NA work on AAA and a number of questions on how to proceed with this topic in the framework of the MIG [Slides: 20150312_MIWP-3_AAA+MIWP-4b_RDF_way_forward.pptx].
Hugo said that developing common approaches for AAA should have a high priority since access control has been identified in the mid-term evaluation as a major stumbling block for making use of INSPIRE. He pointed out that according to Art. 17(2) of the INSPIRE Directive, the data sharing measures adopted by public authorities in the MS "shall preclude any restrictions likely to create practical obstacles, occurring at the point of use, to the sharing of spatial data sets and services."
[Action] JRC to share final report (and other deliverables) from the ARE3NA AAA study. [#2370]
[Action] All to provide feedback on and indicate willingness to contribute to proposed AAA activities in ARE3NA and/or MIWP-3 (e.g. extended testbed, pilot implementation around the gazetteer or Art. 17(4) use case. [#2371]
MIWP-4a on PIDs¶
Christian Ansorge reported that there has not been much progress on refining the action description.
Marc Leobet highlighted that France would need guidelines for PIDs in INSPIRE very soon, in order not to develop their own solution. Michael pointed out that concrete guidelines for PIDs for spatial objects based on http URIs already exist (for several years) in Annex H of the Generic Conceptual Model and an FAQ page on identifiers at http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/ids and that these should be the starting point for any discussion about PIDs (at least for spatial objects). Since these seem not be well known, he suggested to extract them into a separate guidelines guidelines document and provide this for review by the MIG-T.
[Action] All to review existing PID guidance and provide concrete feedback on what is missing or needs to be improved. [#2372]
Heidi promoted A Beginner’s Guide to Persistent Identifiers developed by GBIF. The guide covers the practice of issuing and maintaining Persistent Identifiers for primary biodiversity data from a beginner's perspective. It also includes information explaining the costs and benefits of implementing Persistent Identifiers. She proposed that it would be useful if MIG-T could endorse this (or other) reports, with additional comments/clarifications specific for INSPIRE, if needed.
MIWP-4b on RDF & INSPIRE¶
Michael Lutz presented the outcomes of the ARE3NA work on RDF for INSPIRE and a number of questions on how to proceed with this topic in the framework of the MIG [Slides: 20150312_MIWP-3_AAA+MIWP-4b_RDF_way_forward.pptx].
In 2015, ARE3NA work will focus on testing the GeoDCAT-AP extension that is currently being developed by ISA (under action 1.1 SEMIC) and on a testbed on applications based on INSPIRE RDF data.
About the work on the GeoDCAT-AP, Michael reminded the participants about the information sent some while ago by Andrea Perego (JRC):
The development of a geospatial extension to DCAT-AP (chaired by JRC) will be carried out in close coordination with the working group taking care of the revision of DCAT-AP. The objective is to consolidate and complete the work started in the framework of ARe3NA on the alignment of INSPIRE metadata with DCAT-AP, and documented on the MIG wiki.
More details are available on the main page of DCAT-AP, in a specific section: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/#Geo-DCAT-AP
If are interested to join the working group, please go to https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/ and register as a member of DCAT-AP by following the same procedure described in the previous mail.
We have also a specific mailing list: dcat_application_profile-geo. The link to subscribe to it will be visible after your registration.
Michael asked for examples of applications built on geospatial linked data. Hugo mentioned a presentation entitled 'From Open towards Linking Marine Data?' at the recent Marine Spatial Data Infrastructures (MSDI) Open Forum in London.
[Action] All to provide feedback on and indicate willingness to contribute to proposed RDF activities in ARE3NA. [#2374]
Discussion on the usability of INSPIRE data and services¶
Michael Lutz presented the detailed analysis of blocking factors for developing a pan-European gazetteer that was carried out by the contractor currently developing the pan-European Open Data Portal for DG CONNECT [Slides: Fitness-for-purpose_INSPIRE.pptx, Observations of MS GN data and services: INSPIRE_geographical_names_sources_assessment.xlsx].
Participants agreed that this use case should be investigated further to identify issues that still prevent building value-added applications on top of INSPIRE. [Action JRC] [#2375]
The two approaches (1. extending INSPIRE data/services for national needs vs. 2. providing separate data sets/services for INSPIRE and for national needs) were also discussed. The majority of participants follow approach 2.
APIs for INSPIRE¶
Joeri Robrecht and Emilio Lopez presented the work done in Flanders [Slides: APIs_Flanders.pdf] and Spain [Slides:attachment:APIs_Spain.pptx] on simple APIs for accessing INSPIRE data.
It was discussed whether there is a need for creating common guidelines (does something have to be standardised) or collecting best practices in this area. Joeri suggested to follow the best practices developed in the W3C Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group.
It was agreed to initially collect other examples of similar activities in other countries and potentially organise a webinar on this topic [Action all]. [#2376]
Round-table about plans for implementing the SDS IRs¶
Christina Wasström presented several points related to SDS for discussion and agreement [Sldies: SDS.pptx] on day 1, and, after the initial discussion further points for agreement [Slides: SDS_final version.pptx] for agreement.
It was agreed that
- The purpose with figure 2 in TG SDS 3.1 is just to clarify that Network services will not be affected by the amendments
- Network services will have no additional metadata
- SDS will have additional metadata described according to amandment IR 1205/2010, deadline for this action is December 2015
- When an SDS operate on data that is harmonised, additional information for "Interoperable SDS" has to be documented, deadline for this action is 2016 or 2021 depending on theme.
- If an SDS operate on harmonised data, it is up to a member state to decide if a SDS should follow some extra requriments or not, e.g quality of service
- To decide if a service is an INSPIRE SDS; 1) At least 1 INSPIRE theme is included 2) The service is of interest for others outside you own organisation
- Rule of thumb when a MS decide if a service is an SDS or not; Prefer to have more SDS than less
It was agreed to elaborate these points in a document and present it to the EC for agreement [Action Christina]. [#2377]
Conclusions and next steps¶
It was agreed to keep the slot for virtual meetings (4th Thursday of every month, 10-11:30 CE(S)T) and to have the next meeting at the end of April.
At the INSPIRE conference, there will be an overview session of the on-going MIG-T activities on Monday, 25 May, from 15:00-17:30 and several MIG-related meetings on Friday, 29 May:
- MIG-P: 9:00-10:30
- MIG-T: 11:00-12:30
- MIWP-5: 13:30-15:00
- MIWP-8: 15:30-17:00
- MIG-T: Jiri Polacek (CZ), Marisol Gomez (ES), Emilio Lopez (ES), Andreas Hadjiraftis (CY), Alexander Ramage (UK), Arvid Lillethun (NO), Christina Wasström (SE), Kjell Horth (SE), Henrique Silva (PT), Carlo Cipolloni (IT), Michel Grothe (NL), Arvids Ozols (LV), Peep Krusberg (EE), Jiri Kvapil (CZ), Miroslav Rolko (SK), Benoit David (FR), Marc Leobet (FR), Hugo de Groof (DG ENV), Marcin Grudzien (PL), Tim Duffy (UK), Daniele Hogrebe (DE), Bozidar Pavicevic (Montenegro), Darja Lihteneger (EEA), Christian Ansorge (EEA), Lars Storgaard (DK), Heidi Vanparys (DK), Joeri Robrecht (BE), Jari Reini (FI), Panu Muhli (FI), Zhenya Valcheva (BG), Robert Tomas (JRC), Michael Lutz (JRC)
- TC Facilitators (only 11/3): Keiran Millard, Rob van Ede, Matthew Harrison, Lena Halin-Pihlatie, Jordi Escriu, Brian MacSharry, Anja Hopfstock, Angel Lopez, Miroslaw Migacz