6th meeting 2014-04-09-10 Arona Italy

Wednesday/Thursday, 9-10 April 2014
Hotel Concordia, Arona, Italy


Wednesday, 9 April 2014

9:00-9:10 Welcome and approval of the agenda (Michael Lutz)

9:10-9:15 Minutes of the previous meeting (for discussion and agreement)

09:15-09:45 Division of roles between MIG and INSPIRE Committee (Hugo de Groof)
  • Discussion in the INSPIRE Committee meeting on 28/3/2014
  • Proposed updates to the MIG ToR
9:45-10:30 SOS-based download service (Matthes Rieke, 52North)
  • Presentation of intermediate results of ARE3NA study on SOS-based download services, including the proposed updates of the Download service TG and a demo of the open source software developed by 52North. This presentation will also report on outcomes of the SOS workshop on 8/4.

10:30-11:00 COFFEE BREAK

11:00-12:30 MIG working methods (Michael Lutz, Chris Schubert)
  • Change management process, maintenance workflow: how to propose/submit/address issues (beside the rolling work programme)?
  • Use of Redmine: structure, responsibilities, issue tracking, ...
  • Including minor issues proposed in September 2013

12:30-14:00 LUNCH

14:00-15:15 Update on on-going MIG actions (Michael Lutz, Chris Schubert, Paul Hasenohr)
  • MIWP-3: Access control
  • MIWP-4: RDF+PIDs
  • MIWP-6: Registers
  • GML-related actions (MIWP-11/12/18)
  • MIWP-16: Monitoring and reporting
15:15-15:30 Bar camp pitches
  • Pitch a discussion topic (specific experiences / success stories / issues) in 1 minute that you would like to discuss over coffee
15:30-16:15 COFFEE BREAK + Bar camp
  • Choose a rapporteur to report back to the plenary

16:15-16:30 Reports from bar camp sessions

16:30-16:50 MIWP-19 Explore and improvement on the situation of controlled vocabularies in the framework of INSPIRE (Chistian Ansorge)
  • Exchange of ideas on new action included in the WP; planning of next steps
16:50-17:10 MIWP-5 Validation and conformity testing (Daniela Hogrebe, Marc Leobet)
  • Planning of initial workshop

17:10-17:30 Monitoring of harvesting results of the INSPIRE geoportal (Angelo Quaglia)

18:30 Aperitivo by the lake

Thursday, 10 April 2014

9:00-9:20 MIWP-17: Data and service sharing & licencing models (Darja Lihteneger)
  • Exchange of ideas on new action included in the WP
9:20-9:40 Harvesting INSPIRE metadata to the pan-European Open Data Portal (Andrea Perego)
  • Summary of telecon with Open Data Support project (DG CONNECT)
  • Proposed mappings INSPIRE metadata - DCAT application profile
9:40-10:30 Break-out groups on planning and next steps
  • MIWP-17: Data and service sharing & licencing models
  • Harvesting INSPIRE metadata to the pan-European Open Data Portal

10:30-11:00 COFFEE BREAK

11:00-11:15 Report from break-out groups

11:15-12:30 Thematic clusters, pilots and updates of data specifications TG (Vanda Nunes de Lima, Robert Tomas, Markus Seifert)
  • MIWP-14: Exchange of implementation experiences in thematic domains / process for setting up and facilitating thematic clusters
  • MIWP-13: Update of data specifications
  • Thematic pilots planned by JRC/EEA/ENV & interaction with MIG

12:30-14:00 LUNCH

14:00-14:30 MIWP-8: Update of Metadata TG (Tim Duffy)
  • Integration in the TG of the evaluation and use discovery metadata elements (6 common MD elements included in the IR on data interoperability)
  • Possible integration in the TG of the evaluation and use discovery metadata (additional theme-specific 'recommended' elements included in the data specifications TG)
  • new SDS discovery service metadata profile (19119 etc.) extensions
14:30 -15:30 INSPIRE Communication (Karen Fullerton, Lorena Hernandez Quiros)
  • Update of INSPIRE web site
  • MIWP-2: FAQ section

15:30-16:00 COFFEE BREAK

16:00-16:15 AOB

16:15-17:00 Wrap-up and next steps

FINAL Minutes


The minutes are based on the notes taken by the scribes Chris Schubert, Lorena Hernandez Quiros and Michael Lutz.

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.

No. Action Redmine issue Responsible Due Done
4 Propose working methods, procedures and tools EC 30/11/2013
23 Propose members for a sub-group on XML schema maintenance MIG representatives 7/2/2014
26 Share relevant events with the group all continuous
40 Investigate whether JRC can transfer collected detailed issues to Redmine JRC 20140328
41 Add a link on the INSPIRE web site to the meeting minutes of the MIG collaboration space JRC 2014-04-30
42 Modify the ToR to clarify that the MIG consists of 2 permanent sub-groups DG ENV 2014-04-14 x
43 Set-up sub-group of MIWP 7 Extension of Download Service TG for observation JRC 2014-05-15
44 Publish the Redmine Tutorial on the wiki JRC 2014-04-24
45 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
46 Send around instructions on the configuration of the harvesting and how to access the harvesting reports. JRC 2014-04-30
47 Inform JRC if they are willing to be contacted by the contractor (PwC) on this topic MIG representatives 2014-04-30
48 Draft a new task MIWP-21 for following pilot activities JRC 2014-04-17 x
49 Draft a proposal for updating MIWP-14 to include the current MIWP-13 JRC 2014-04-17 x
50 Draft ToR and launch a call for participation/nominations for a temporary sub-group for MIWP-8 Sweden (Michael Oestling) 2014-05-15
51 Send suggestions of good examples of web sites to Karen All 2014-05-30
52 Set up a communication sub-group JRC 2014-05-30

Welcome and approval of the agenda

Michael welcomed the participants and ask them to shortly introduce themselves in a tour de table. The agenda of the meeting was approved as proposed on the wiki. Michael asked the participants to help gathering FAQs for MIWP-2

Minutes of the previous meeting

The minutes of the last telecon (on 2014-03-12) were approved as currently on the wiki

  • Will the MIG minutes be published on the INSPIRE web site?
    • Michael: Minutes are already open to the public on the MIG collaboration space.
    • [Action] JRC to put a link on the INSPIRE web site to the meeting minutes of the MIG collaboration space

Division of roles between MIG and INSPIRE Committee

Hugo de Groof presented the discussions on the proposed Terms of Reference (ToR) of the MIG.

Based on these discussions, a new version of the ToR have been proposed establishing two permanent sub-groups of the MIG: one on technical issues (the current MIG) and one on policy-related issues, whose task will be to discuss and provide advice on the evolution of INSPIRE and its relationship with other policies, including the endorsement of the MIG's work programme. Comments have been invited by MS by 9/4. Based on these the ToR will be finalized and adopted through "written procedure".

  • Arvid: Is the MIG consisting of only the two permanent sub-groups, or will there be 3 groups (the MIG and the two permanent sub-groups)?
    • Michael: The MIG will consist of only the 2 permanent sub-groups (see Art. 4)
    • [Action] DG ENV to modify the ToR to clarify this (e.g. change "The INSPIRE MIG and permanent sub-groups shall be chaired ..." to "The INSPIRE MIG permanent sub-groups shall be chaired ..." in Art. 5.1.)

SOS-based download service

Michael gave an introduction to the topic. The technical guidelines on download services could be updated including the OGC standard Sensor Observation Service (SOS). He also pointed out some ideas raised on the workshop of the day before.

Matthes Rieke (52ºNorth) presented intermediate results of ARE3NA study on SOS-based download services and the outcome of the SOS workshop on 08/04/2014 in Arona [add link to slides].

  • Joeri: Will the REST API currently implemented for 52ºNorth SOS be brought into the OGC process?
    • Matthes: It is not currently a standard, but may be submitted to OGC and/or other standardization bodies
  • Matthes: include examples in Technical Guidelines (TG) for offerings, metadata, languages? Instead, this could maybe also be a separate "best practices" document in order to keep the TGs light.
  • Michael: Is adding the SOS to the Download services TG generally a good idea?
    • Joeri/Markus Jobst: The SOS could also be considered to be an SDS (e.g. the simple REST interface)
  • Arvid: Is the EC/EEA going to propose using the SOS for collecting environmental reporting data?
    • Paul Hasenohr: will need to be checked with colleagues responsible for reporting streams
    • Vanda: The current SOS activities were started in the JRC/EEA/ENV pilot on INSPIRE-based e-reporting for air quality
    • Carlo C.: Different processes in the different MS, e.g. in Italy ISPRA (Institute for Environmental Protection and Research) is aggregating at national level from the SOS data provided by the Italian regions for reporting to EEA
    • Hugo: Reporting data is often aggregated, but access to the source observations (at the data custodians) should be available to do further analyses.
  • Benoit: A sub-group should be set up to follow the SOS activities
    • [Action] Set-up sub-group of MIWP 7 Extension of Download Service TG for observation.
  • Joeri: What about view services for SOS: instead of getting a map, to get a chart?

MIG working methods

Michael Lutz and Chris Schubert (JRC) presented in this session the MIG working methods and procedures.
  • Change management process, maintenance workflow: how to propose/submit/address issues (beside the rolling work program)
  • Use of Redmine: structure, responsibilities, permission roles (difference between developers and reporters), issue tracking, how to be notified (degree of notification by setting the account),etc.
    • Including minor issues proposed in September 2013
    • [Action] JRC to publish the Redmine Tutorial on the wiki
  • Presentation of "INSPIRE Contact Points Mockup" as submission and information Service in order to avoid bottlenecks, emphasizing the role of member states.
    • The mockup presented gives access to FAQs, MS or EC contact depending on the issue. A combo box where to select area of interest is a first level of "triage".
      [Slides: 20140904_MIG_tool.pdf]
  • How will accounts be created?
    • Once agreed as official members of sub-groups, experts need to register themselves in Redmine
    • Redmine admins (JRC, EEA) will then add them to the relevant sub-project
  • Robert: many issues should be re-directed to the thematic clusters (MIWP-14)
  • Michael: Which MS have already set up something similar?
    • FR, IT (+/-), CZ, SK, AT
  • Hugo: Why not set up a common forum with one sub-forum for each country (managed by them) in order to avoid losing the track?
  • Marc: Good to make use of national representatives, also to address language issues. Many questions have already been asked before
Michael asked the participants how they organise contributions to the MIF and nominations to temporary MIG sub-groups
  • Spain
    • National SDI organization: call for experts
    • Some experts have replied individually because they are interested in a topic.
    • Also experts from organisations related to specific themes interested in MIWP-13/14. How can we merge- include national existing subgroups in MIG?
    • Several calls done, probably will be repeated periodically
  • UK
    • Governance group: Architecture and interoperability group (including Defra, data.gov.uk); will be widened to also include private companies
    • Identify experts from within this group
  • Greece
    • Small network
    • Every public authority to nominate experts
    • FAQ page established
    • Next step: set up forum
  • Austria
    • Coordination body with federal states
    • Call for experts ñ response was very low
    • Directly contacted experts
    • Problem: how to get feedback from experts on their work within the MIG sub-groups?
      • Invite experts for presentations on their work
      • Open workshop for wider stakeholders
    • Problem: short notice for nominations
  • Sweden
    • Send message about Pool of Experts (PoE) to network of around 600 stakeholders, but very limited feedback / few nominations
    • INSPIRE network --> more nominations from there
    • Will organize specific sub-networks on specific topics
  • France
    • French SDI network (discussion list)
    • How is the pool of experts managed?
      • Directly address the PoE for web conferences / meetings etc.
      • How to get people from the "fringe" of INSPIRE, e.g. for discussions on Open data etc.
Michael opened the questions on how sub-groups should be set up - should we also allow applications from PoE? How and when should the PoE be used in general?
  • Sweden: first solution should be to use the PoE. Only look beyond if there are not enough experts?
  • Emilio: In some cases (e.g. for MIWP-16) the national MIG representatives should be consulted about sub-group nominees from their countries
  • Arvid: Use consistent terminology. Distinguish between "permanent sub-groups" and "temporary subgroups"
  • Paul: Need to define clear ToR for sub-groups
  • Vanda: Need to strike a balance between number of issues to be addressed and number of people to address them
  • Benoit: How to agree on update of TG, to have 3 reviews always with a greater extension of the review community?
    • Michael: this depends on the importance of the issue being addressed in the update. For minor issues, the review process should be light.

Update on on-going MIG actions

[Slides: 20140409_Update_on-going_actions.pdf]

MIWP-3: Access control

Michael presented the status and the next steps of the ARE3NA AAA study.

  • Jari: Is OpenId considered in the study?
  • Jari: roles are important. Focus on a handful of roles.
  • Alex: focus on G2G use case, then extend further
    • Jari: This is not enough.
    • Joeri: also consider OpenId, Facebook id, OAuth --> consider end users (broad public)
  • UK: The experience and advice of UK is to try make a big simplification to allow the government interoperability
  • Joeri: Also consider management of certificates (SSL)
  • Arvid: Consider also restricting access not just at the service level, but also the attribute level
  • Michael: proposed to keep it simple for the beginning
  • Markus: AT has focused on G2G, managed to open to business as well by giving them. Recommends to try to keep it modular to allow it to grow
  • Finland: If following the Open Data trend, AAA will be easier.
  • Hugo: focus on G2G, cross-border, harmonized implementation across Europe


Michael presented the status and the next steps of the ARE3NA RDF+PIDs study.

  • Joeri: Will the proposed UML-to-RDF methodology also include mapping of associations?
    • Michael: yes
  • Joeri: will there be mappings to existing vocabularies?
    • Michael: yes, this should be considered, too.
  • Joeri: also mapping to JSON/geoJSON would be interesting
    • +1 from Jari. Mapping from XMl to Json is more straightforward than to RDF
  • Jari: also important to have common view of PID management
  • Arvid: For what kind of data would RDF (linked data) be most interesting?
    • Place names (GN), administrative units, cadastral parcels, buildings
    • +1 by Benoit; we should have a strategy on which themes to focus on
  • Paul: who are the target customers for RDF?
    • Benoit: important to publish and get it right from the beginning
    • Martin: got more attention when started talking about RDF for INSPIRE data
  • Martin: Which themes will be addressed in the RDF study?
    • Michael: current proposals are: TN, SU, BU, HY, AM, LC (each by a single RDF expert) + EF (by all three external RDF experts)

MIWP-6: Registers

Michael presented the outcomes of the Registries and Registers workshop in January and the planning for task MIWP-6:
  • Testbed to connect MS registries to european Registry
  • In May an internal release of the Re3gistry software and INSPIRE registry service will be made available for testing
  • JRC will also set up a sand box environment
  • Darja: need for guidelines for extensions ? where are they published?
    • Robert, there sould be a formal procedure
  • Marc: Reminder of conclusions of registry workshop --> registry of registers. The registry must be publicly available and known
    • Sylvain: where to publish extensions done by thematic communities?
  • Jari: Watch closely proposed ISO work on Registry service
    • Michael: we are following ISO 19135-2 but we are not really developing a service, is more about a software. The application is built, as a REST API for URLs, what is not supported so far is to query programmatically items across the Registry.
  • Benoit: What about publishing also Feature Catalogue (FC)?
    • Plans to connect FCD to HTML version of FC generated from UML as practical suggestion

MIWP-10: Update on data schemas

Michael presented the outcomes of the task MIWP-10:

MIWP-11/12/18: GML-related actions

Chris presented the issues to be addressed by the sub-group on GML-related issues:

  • clarification of GML encoding for spatial data (GML3.3, 3.2)
    • Discussion on complex/simple features
  • GML 3.3 is not widely supported by commercial or FOSS GIS
    • Joeri: Oskari is able to deal with GML3.3.
  • Clarification of UML to GML Encoding Rules
  • Planning workshops for May and at the INSPIRE Conference

MIWP-16: Monitoring and reporting

Paul presented the status and the next steps of the work in the sub-group on improving the reliability of monitoring information. A questionnaire has been sent to MS for reviewing current M&R indicators and defining functional requirements for the dashboard.

  • Hugo: proposal to add further indicators to M&R to allow to demonstrate how INSPIRE resources are being used and for what. INSPIRE is about better access. Point to applications which are benefitting from INSPIRE resources as another source of indicators.

Bar camp session

The bar camp session was cancelled due to lack of time (and ideas). It will be attempted to have bar camp discussions at the next physical meeting.

The following bar camp ideas were proposed:
  • Silvain Grellet:
    • We have :
      • reporting streams that apply/extend Inspire models & vocabulary when necessary (AQD, draft UWWTD)
      • EU projects lead by communities that do the same : I could give couple examples for geoscience
    • How can we organize/coordinate ourselves so that :
      • we have the same answer to the same questions => how do we keep different reporting obligations (or other extensions, be they thematic or national) from developing similar but incompatible extensions ?
      • we can give visibility/sustainability to such extensions ?
      • it does not end only in e-mails being send to JRC mail box
  • Benoit David:
    • What could a strategy/roadmap for developing ontologies and vocabularies for INSPIRE

MIWP-19: Explore and improvement on the situation of controlled vocabularies in the framework of INSPIRE

Christian presented the issues to be addressed by this task. Vocabularies are considered mainly for use in metadata at the moment. Not only GEMET (very generic) should be considered, but also more theme-specific thesauri like SoilThes.
[Slides: 20141004_MIG_MIWP19_CoVoc.pdf]

  • Evgenia: Are Controlled Vocabularies (CVs) first steps for an INSPIRE ontology?
    • Christian: started from CVs for metadata (starting from GEMET)
  • Carlo: eENVplus project has a WP to build an environmental thesaurus framework to support metadata search & enhancement of data specifications.
    • Proposal to present at INSPIRE conference
    • Service planned to be up in September 2014
  • Robert: would be useful to have mappings from INSPIRE feature concepts to GEMET concepts
    • +1 by Michael (also at the level of themes)
    • Paul: who defined exact match e.g. between INSPIRE theme soil and GEMET concept soil? (--> EEA) More important to have vocabularies with good definitions so that users can have a clear idea what the concept they use in metadata or search mean
    • Arvid: not afraid of unclear links. Better to get more results in catalogue searches.
    • Joeri: not use too many vocabularies, it's not manageable, many of them do not have versioning support, better to go for a core set of vocabularies
    • +1 by Vanda

MIWP-5: Validation and conformity testing

Daniela presented the plans for this task - to develop a commonly agreed metadata validator with commonly agreed rules - and the proposed structure of the 2-day workshop on 15-16 May in Ispra. She reminded participants to nominate the experts in RedMine.
[Slides: 20140409_MIWP-5.pdf]
  • Michael: do you have plans to connect MIWP-5 with MIWP-16? The results of what is in the metadata and what the report says is very different.
  • Michael: Would Member States be happy to automate Monitoring & Reporting or the prefer to have it more controlled?
    • Daniela: They prefer to rely on Metadata whatever the result is.
  • Question: can all three topics (validation of metadata, network services and data) be covered by the same experts?
    • Daniela: The planned MIWP-5 sub-group will be split in 3 sub-sub-groups

Monitoring of harvesting results of the INSPIRE geoportal

Angelo explained how the harvesting works [Slides: 20140410_INSPIRE_Geoportal_Web_Services.pdf]. The geoportal harvests the CSW registerd in geoportal. Validation reports are created as metadata are harvested. These also include information about performance (response time). There is an API, through which it is prossible to query the reports. To have access to the service, a request is needed in order to allow access for a specific IP address.
  • Joeri: are there still problems with self-signed (=untrusted) SSL certificates
    • Angelo: Geoportal does not reject any SSL certificates, so this is not a problem.
  • Emilio: Spain has >100.000 metadata entries. When discovery service is down, all Spanish metadata disappears. He suggests to harvest just the updated metadata
    • Angelo: Harvesting is not performed if the discovery service is not reachable. In some cases, the harvesting starts but then the discovery services gets slower and slower. Currently all discovery services seems to be performing well.
    • Michael: Would it be difficult to implement incremental updates?
      • Angelo: Not really, but it was agreed in IOC TF to implement the complete harvesting. For incremental harvesting, first an agreement would be needed on a protocol for detecting new and missing items.
  • Marcin: Some of the Polish metadata records are not harvested because of time-out sessions. How can this be avoided?
    • Angelo: could be checked at the end of the harvesting. There are 3 attempts.
  • Daniela: Sometimes problems that not all German metadata are harvested. Questions: how often do you harvest? Are there maintenance considerations?
    • Angelo: Also sometimes the national discovery services has fewer results than they should have at the time of harvesting

[Action] 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.

[Action] JRC to send around instructions on the configuration of the harvesting and how to access the harvesting reports.

MIWP-17: Data and service sharing & licencing models

Darja presented an analysis on data licencing from regular 3 years reports and from metadata.
[Slides: 20141004_MIG_MIWP17.pdf]
  • Difficult to understand when free text because of being written in many languages.
  • Heterogeneous approaches to data sharing (the sharing among public authorities and public has to be distinguished).
  • This action is connected to e-government and Open data approaches.
  • Darja identified some obstacles for the sharing: difficult to engage the organisations for price charging (inflexible pricing models), metadata missing information ( conditions for use/access are unclear)
  • Joeri: Describing licenses in the "restrictions to evaluation and use" MD element makes it difficult to use. We should have a common way to describe this in MD, using a direct link. Suggestion: TAG with the name of license + URL to the website in the metadata file.
    • Angelo: This can already be done using Anchor statement

Harvesting INSPIRE metadata to the pan-European Open Data Portal

Andrea presented the outcomes of a telecon held with Open Data Support project (funded by DG CONNECT)[Slides: 20141004_Inspire_dcat_ap.pdf]. The pan-European Open Data Portal does not yet exist, but there is a prototype.
  • Concerns were raised about the duplication of records. The discussion was more focused on Data Licensing. Finally the conclusion was that it was better to federate national open data portals (which should include the national open INSPIRE data), not the INSPIRE geoportal.
  • DCAT AP: extension of W3C DCAT to easy the interchange of metadata across Europe.
  • Strongly related to http URIs: recommendation on reusing as much as possible the INSPIRE registry + other vocabularies in order to link better.
  • Joeri: Problem of URIs should be considered in ARE3NA RDF+PIDs study
    • [Action] JRC to ensure that this topic is taken into account. MIG representatives should inform JRC if they are willing to be contacted by the contractor (Deloitte) on this topic

Report from break-out groups

MIWP-17: Data and service sharing & licencing models

See Darja's slides [Slides: attachment:DSS and licences discussion.pdf]. There is a need to
  1. Classify constraints & conditions
    • The dissemination is different for different users. One dataset can have several licenses.
  2. Proposal for machine readable licences
    • Nominate experts from PoE to set up a group
  • Greece: What about reusing Creative Commons + add-ons. Already some licenses refer to CC
  • Do we have to look at or from the eyes of INSPIRE or PSI? Are there many differences between INSPIRE & PSI?
  • Martin: Include answer by Hugo on infringements related to data sharing. "Case law"

Harvesting INSPIRE metadata to the pan-European Open Data Portal

  • Missing elements: Should define vocabularies
  • Mappings: should be published
  • Using URIs in metadata elements: is feasible, not easy, but we still have to do it
  • Should we open an Open Data subgroup? --> This topic should be discussed by the (new) metadata sub-group

Thematic clusters, pilots and updates of data specifications TG

Robert presented the planned activities around setting up thematic clusters (MIWP-14) and proposed, together with Markus Seifert, to merge MIWP-13 and MIWP-14. Vanda presented current and planned activities around pilots, involving JRC, policy DGs (mainly DG ENV), the EEA and interested stakeholder organisations in the MS.

  • Marc: Why do you propose to merge tasks MIWP-13 and MIWP-14? MIWP-13 should be addressing very specific topics, while MIWP-14 should be looking at coordination between INSPIRE and thematic policies (including the pilots). This proposed change should be consulted with permanent policy sub-group.

Michael clarified the relationships between the MIWP and other work programmes (e.g. of JRC, DG ENV, EEA, MS and ISA).

  • Marc: The governance of tasks (e.g. pilots, ARE3NA tasks) should be clearly defined. E.g. The governance for the ISA actions AR3NA and EULF should be with the ISA SIS WG, which should provide feedback on work programmes of ARE3NA and EULF. There is also a need to have discussions on coordination of INSPIRE with thematic legislation. Should this be done by the permanent policy sub-group and/or a temporary sub-group on following the pilot activities?
  • Hugo: We should not overload the scope of the thematic clusters. E.g. use case "Implementation of MSFD" overlaps with Habitats Directive, WFD, ... Some MS have already implemented INSPIRE for this domain, e.g. DE implemented a marine SDI (MDI-DE), which almost perfectly implements INSPIRE, including extended data models, network services, ... We should focus our attentions on pilots, and limit ourselves on a few priority cases
  • Marc: Proposal: Policy sub-group to be informed about work done in the pilots, so that the representatives can coordinate at national level with the responsible agencies and other stakeholders
    • +1 by Hugo, who supports improved coordination at national level, but in many cases the representatives in many groups don't know the INSPIRE representatives. We should not have another governance level for pilots - we need to start work on them as soon as possible.
  • Alex R.: Concentrate on very small number of pilots, more will not be feasible for finding national authorities. Then extend to other areas later.
  • Michael: clearly distinguish between the purposes of tasks MIWP-13, MIWP-14 and discussions around pilots
    • Robert: +1 discussions from MIWP-14 should feed into topics to be addressed in MIWP-13
  • Alex: proposal to have a new task MIWP-21 in the MIWP to follow the pilot applications
    • General agreement
    • Goals could include:
      • Identify relevant experts & organisations and support coordination at the national level
      • Feedback and review of best practices for developing
    • [Action] JRC to draft a new task MIWP-21 for following pilot activities
  • MIWP-13 and MIWP-14 - split or merge?
    • Robert: merge, to have a motivation for participant. Avoid that different people discuss the proposal than those that edit the TG
    • Paul: split and have MIWP-13 as an editorial board collecting input and suggesting update of a specific TG once a critical mass is received.
    • [Action] JRC to draft a proposal for updating MIWP-14 to include the current MIWP-13

MIWP-8: Update of Discovery Service MS MD schemas and tools

Tim gave an overview of the changes made in the metadata Technical Guideline in autumn 2013 and illustrated additional updates that may be needed.

  • Michael:
    • Need to be clear on the difference between TG and IR
    • DS MD follow a different implementation timeline
    • This should be taken into account when updating the TG
  • Arvid: This will not be the last time we update the MD TG - other changes have been proposed in the MIG (e.g. related to licences, open data, URIs etc.)
  • Robert: evaluation+use metadata elements were left in the DS deliberately
  • Alex: +1 for having a MD update now, and +1 for having the evaluation+use metadata elements in MD TG (but also in the DS)
    • Important to have the MD tool providers on board
  • Michael: Ne clear about the scope of the one update. Should we limit the update strictly to what is required in the MD, SDS and ISDSS IRs or also include other improvements (e.g. related to licences, open data, usage of URIs, ...)?
  • Daniela: Also consider some technical issues that have been raised in the past (e.g. inconsistencies with ISO standards)
  • Marc: impossible for France to recommend the update of the TG of 2013 because there was not consultation on the updates
    • Michael: The updated version contains only clarifications and additional examples to make the TG more readable, no change of the substance of how to do things. But for sure consultations will have to be done for any further (substantial) updates.
  • Christina: Sweden had already nominated a volunteer to lead MIWP-8 (Michael Oestling). He will draft the ToR for a sub-group in order to start the activity as soon as possible.

[Action] Michael Oestling to draft the ToR for a sub-group and launch call for participation/nominations.

INSPIRE Communication

Karen presented initial ideas for updating of INSPIRE web site.

  • Christina: The INSPIRE web site should include a calendar of meetings and events, including MIG meetings, ISA meetings
  • Evgenia: The redesign should focus on the needs of visitors. Don't only replace text by pictures.
    • Good example: UK government web site's entry page: "Are you looking for something? Or do you want to know how the UK gov spends the taxpayer's money?"
  • Marc: Impossible to distinguish among 34 themes from icons.
  • [Action] All to send suggestions of good examples of web sites to Karen.
  • Hugo:
    • Can we implement harvesting of events, best practices etc. in all the different countries?
    • Include a map of Europe with links to the national INSPIRE web sites
    • Include all the presentations from the INSPIRE conferences, tagged using keywords
    • One search box that returns all the information tagged (videos, presentations, documents), maybe also from national websites
  • Establish a group working on communication channels, which would bring communication people from MS together through the MIG?
    • Marc: +1 very important to also access the national content through the INSPIRE web site
  • [Action] JRC to set up a communication sub-group.

Lorena presented the scope of the MIWP-2: FAQ section, which is very much related to the web site. It is in an initial phase at the moment just collecting questions. Several countries have their own FAQ page that could be a source for the content to include. She also thanked the participants for the FAQ proposed during the meeting. These will be also another source to take into account for the section.


Karen asked for volunteers to chair sessions at the INSPIRE Conference.

Wrap-up and next steps

The next meetings will be:
  • 5th virtual meeting: Tuesday, 27 May 9:30-11:00 CEST
  • 3rd physical meeting: INSPIRE Conference, 17 June, 9:00-12:30

20140409_Update_on-going_actions.pdf - Update on on-going MIG actions (Michael Lutz, Chris Schubert, Paul Hasenohr) (495 KB) Michael Lutz, 18 Apr 2014 01:20 pm

20140410_INSPIRE_Geoportal_Web_Services.pdf - Monitoring of harvesting results of the INSPIRE geoportal (Angelo Quaglia) (944 KB) Michael Lutz, 18 Apr 2014 01:25 pm

20140904_MIG_tool.pdf (1.09 MB) Chris Schubert, 22 Apr 2014 02:00 pm

20141004_MIG_MIWP19_CoVoc.pdf - The situation of controlled vocabularies in the framework of INSPIRE (836 KB) Chris Schubert, 22 Apr 2014 02:22 pm

20140409_MIWP-5.pdf - Validation and conformity testing (Daniela Hogrebe, BKG) (167 KB) Chris Schubert, 22 Apr 2014 02:26 pm

20141004_MIG_MIWP17.pdf - Data and service sharing & licencing models (Darja Lihteneger) (115 KB) Chris Schubert, 22 Apr 2014 02:28 pm

DSS and licences discussion.pdf - break-out group DSS and licences discussion (147 KB) Chris Schubert, 22 Apr 2014 02:34 pm

20141004_Inspire_dcat_ap.pdf - INSPIRE metadata and DCAT-AP (1.2 MB) Chris Schubert, 23 Apr 2014 10:18 am

MIWP-8.pptx - Presentation on MIWP-8 Metadata updates MDTG updates, DS requirements and SDS Requirements (139 KB) Tim Duffy, 15 May 2014 10:28 am