Hi Michael,
The rules defined by 19115, but also in 19139 (and in specific use of thses standards with profiles) can’t be all implemented with XSD solutions. The best solution will be to use a other validation mechanism : Schematron (http://www.schematron.com/) seems to be the most powerfull to check all rules and could be included inside the architecture of GN without change the spirit (XML, XSL).
But I don’t know if someone is working of the writing of XSL schematron files from 19115/19139 rules…
Best regards,
Pierre,
De : geonetwork-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:geonetwork-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] De la part de Michael.Gannon@anonymised.com
Envoyé : lundi 21 mai 2007 08:02
À : geonetwork-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Objet : [GeoNetwork-devel] ISO19139 conformance rules in GeoNetwork[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi List,
I have a couple of lofty questions about ISO19115/19139 and how GeoNetwork interprets the specifications.
Reading ISO19115 there are a number of constraints that fall outside the control of the XSDs implemented by 19139 (in the official documentation these are referred to as co-constraints or conformance rules), for example: densityUnits is mandatory if density is provided.
Does conforming to ISO19139 simply mean that your XML is valid against the XSDs? Or must the XML hold up to further interrogation to test the conformance rules in order to claim that is it ISO19139 compliant?
What is the commonly held view in regards to these constraints? And what does claim does GeoNetwork make in regards to these constraints?
I have the spec here but I am asking as there seems to be some degree of uncertainty given the language used in this section of the document and I feel its going to be the ground swell by vendors that will define more clearly the impact of this section of the documentation.
Cheers,
Michael Gannon.
Le contenu de ce mél et de ses pièces jointes est destiné à l’usage exclusif du
(des) destinataire(s) expressément désigné(s) comme tel(s). En cas de réception de ce
mél par erreur, le signaler à son expéditeur et ne pas en divulguer le contenu.
L’absence de virus a été vérifié à l’émission du message. Il convient néanmoins de
vérifier l’absence de contamination à sa réception.
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for
the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error please notify the
system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to
anyone or make copies. eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious
content.
Hi Michael and Pierre,
we planned a two phase validation, one against the XSD schema and another using
schematron or a simple XSL stylesheet to check the spec constraints. Actually,
we postponed this feature due to a lack of time and money.
Cheers,
Andrea
Hi Michael,
The rules defined by 19115, but also in 19139 (and in specific use of thses standards with profiles) can't be all implemented with XSD solutions. The best solution will be to use a other validation mechanism : Schematron (http://www.schematron.com/) seems to be the most powerfull to check all rules and could be included inside the architecture of GN without change the spirit (XML, XSL).
But I don't know if someone is working of the writing of XSL schematron files from 19115/19139 rules...
Best regards,
Pierre,
________________________________
De : geonetwork-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:geonetwork-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] De la part de Michael.Gannon@anonymised.com
Envoyé : lundi 21 mai 2007 08:02
À : geonetwork-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Objet : [GeoNetwork-devel] ISO19139 conformance rules in GeoNetwork[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi List,
I have a couple of lofty questions about ISO19115/19139 and how GeoNetwork interprets the specifications.
Reading ISO19115 there are a number of constraints that fall outside the control of the XSDs implemented by 19139 (in the official documentation these are referred to as 'co-constraints' or 'conformance rules'), for example: "'densityUnits' is mandatory if 'density' is provided".
Does conforming to ISO19139 simply mean that your XML is valid against the XSDs? Or must the XML hold up to further interrogation to test the conformance rules in order to claim that is it ISO19139 compliant?
What is the commonly held view in regards to these constraints? And what does claim does GeoNetwork make in regards to these constraints?
I have the spec here but I am asking as there seems to be some degree of uncertainty given the language used in this section of the document and I feel its going to be the ground swell by vendors that will define more clearly the impact of this section of the documentation.
Cheers,
Michael Gannon.
**********************************************************************************************
Le contenu de ce mél et de ses pièces jointes est destiné à l'usage exclusif du
(des) destinataire(s) expressément désigné(s) comme tel(s). En cas de réception de ce
mél par erreur, le signaler à son expéditeur et ne pas en divulguer le contenu.
L'absence de virus a été vérifié à l'émission du message. Il convient néanmoins de
vérifier l'absence de contamination à sa réception.
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for
the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error please notify the
system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to
anyone or make copies. eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious
content.
**********************************************************************************************