- 4th Virtual Meeting MIG temporary sub-group on Validation and conformity testing 16 October 2015
- Proposed Agenda 10:00 -11:30 (CET)
- Minute 16th October MIWP-5 virtual meeting:
4th Virtual Meeting MIG temporary sub-group on Validation and conformity testing 16 October 2015¶
16th October 2015
Proposed Agenda 10:00 -11:30 (CET)¶
10:00 - 10:10 (Carlo Cipolloni)
Introduction and tasks activities overview¶
10:10 - 10:25 (Michael Lutz)
An update about ATS and ETS procurements¶
10:25 - 10:45 (Ilkka Rinne)
An update about the ATS requirements progress¶
- Discussion about MIWP-5 people can contribute or comment to ATS documents
10:45 - 11:00 (Giacomo Martirano)
Validation Data Spec. schematron rules and GML validation together with OGC¶
11:00 - 11:20 (Christian Ansorge, Robert Tomas, Paul Hasenohr, ...)
short discussion on other subtasks:¶
- ST 2.1 Use case definition
- ST 2.6 Thematic cluster schema or input collect
- ST 3.1 MD requirments and MIWP-8 interaction
11:20 - 11:30 (Carlo Cipolloni)
Next actions and virtual meetings¶
5th Virtual meeting date
6th Virtual meeting date
Minute 16th October MIWP-5 virtual meeting:¶
Carlo has presented an general overview of the MIWP-5 activities progress in the last three months with some references regarding the wiki or email post on the Use cases, ATS WMS and regarding the procurements lunched by JRC during the summer.
Paul and Chris (EEA): Well guess there is no big discussion about use cases, but let's come later to that
Michael has shown a short presentation on procurements lunched
He has presented the ATS procurement lunched in the summer by the JRC and gives to Ilkka Rinne relate to harmonise and complement the Abstract Test Suite drafting tasks started in the MIWP-5. He has also presented the new procurement that will be negotiated with the contractor maybe in November and relate to develop the ETS and INSPIRE testing framework – Requirements.
Ilkka is apologising to not take part to the meeting for overlap with other business, but he has promised to post an update on ATS activity on the wiki.
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: How will the group be involved in the development?
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: Sorry, I can only listen today...
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: Maybe in testing...
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: I mean testing the framework
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: ok, thanks
Paul and Chris (EEA): yes
Giacomo has shown the validation service
He has presented the validation service developed under the eENVplus project and in collaboration with the OGC Cite Engine task, within the Presentation after some open issue relate to ATS requirements an update regarding Schematron of Data Specification has been shown.
Peter Parslow (UK): coordinate order is an essential issue, we can't allow data to be wrong just because some software is!
Darja Lihteneger (EEA): Alignment with XSD schemas 4.0?
Darja Lihteneger (EEA): I apologize but I have to leave. Bye.
Stefania Morrone (IT): maybe I can answer Peter's answer
Some discussion about Coordinate Reference System part relate 2 issues related: order of EPSG and code-list of EPSG in the Data Spec.
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: I guess we have lost Carlo...
Iurie: We arrived to same conclusions for issue 1 and issue 3, just thatIssue 3. "pointHasValidPosition" is in relation with the issue 1. "Issue with Coordinate Reference System test".
Iurie: Because http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/ESPS/0/<EPSGcode> has the order of coordinates X,Y, while urn:ogc:def:crs"ESPS::<ESPSGcode> has order Y,X.
Michael Lutz (JRC): https://github.com/inspire-eu-validation/
Stefania Morrone (IT): the point is that the axis order shall be the one defined by relevant EPSG CRS, but problems we wanted to highlight is that many GIS (and transformation software as well) are not axis aware
Stefania Morrone (IT): OGC suite test fails despite of the encoding used for CRS
Iurie: That's right as well that most GIS software are not axis aware.
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: No, I am sorry.
Peter Parslow (UK): http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/4258 is explicitly lat, long. I don't where the URN encoded versions can be looked up. In my opinion the confusion is due to OGC defining alternative URN based identifiers for e.g. WGS-84 lon/lat (urn:ogc:def:crs:OGC:1.3:CRS84) - but those aren't the CRS identifiers that should be used for INSPIRE. I know that some software prefers to guess coordinate order, based on an internal assumption. I really can't see that software, which isn't axis aware can claim to be GIS software!
Peter Parslow (UK): I'm curious about 'most'; we use a range of software, and only run across this problem in one, in certain circumstances
Carlo with support of Paul and Christian have presented the update a discussed about some proposal to go forward in the Use Case definition and especially the functional and non-functional requirements that are essential to test INSPIRE framework and in particular the ETS procurements that will defined in the next months.
Daniela Hogrebe (DE) 2: We should get feedback from all MS. I expect that you will get feedback from them.
Michael Lutz (JRC): But then someone needs to take an action to request input
Michael Lutz (JRC): I will send around the latest version of requirements for the ETS implementation as we have them in the request for offer
Carlo has presented a new plan for the next two virtual meeting that will be in November and December.