[GeoNetwork-devel] Relationship between instances of Aggregate Classes - Resolution of ISO19115/19139 missing concepts [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Evert, Simon and list,

The email below is of special interest to our metadata editor project:
our client, Bureau of Rural Sciences, which is represented by Evert
wants to be able to have extensions to the standard being reflected in
the editor.

In order to have make the editor as generic as possible, our idea is the
following:

Special cases (like references to grid representations and reference
systems within digital transfer options) will be translated into an
extension XSD to the ISO 19139 that will be inserted in a local GN
instance. GN will pick up that extension automatically and will be
reflected in the 'internal representation' that is currently used for
building the current HTML form and also used as the basis for our XForm.

Of course the resulting metadata document would not match the standard
and will have to be translated back into ISO 19139 at some point.

The question is: which of the 3 solutions below are possible to
implement in GN and how much effort would be involved?

From the perspective of the client, solution 3 would be best: a new

table of relationships. Would that be picked up by GN automatically?
If not, would solution 2?

Thanks,

Roald

On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 15:28 +0930, Bleys, Evert - BRS wrote:

ISSUE:
How to deal with specific instances of one class that refer to only one
instance of another class.

Context
ISO 19115 / ISO 19139 allows for multiple instances of a range of
classes.
ISO 19115 (non-exclusive list)
MD_Metadata has spatialRepresentationInfo [0..*], referenceSystemInfo
[0..1], identificationInfo [1..*], etc
MD_Distribution has distributionFormat [C..*], transferOptions [0..*],
etc
[ISO19139 allows for @id in the associated class for each of these]

USE CASE:
A record may contain more than one MD_Identification -
MD_DataIdentification (DI), or SV_ServiceIdentification (SI)
   When describing a closely coupled service this is logical
(conditionality of srv:operateOn)
       (other cases are less obvious)
In one metadata record there could (often should be):
   more than one MD_DigitalTransferOption(TO)
   more than one MD_Format (DF)
   more than one spatial Representation - MD_GridSpatialRepresenation
(GR), MD_VectorSpatialRepresenation (VR), etc
   more than one MD_ReferenceSystem (RS)

PROBLEM:
   How to relate a specific TO with the appropriate DI/SI, DF, RS, GR,
and VR

SOLUTIONS:
1) UGLY - build a @id in TO that when parsed yields the appropriate
DI/SI, DF, RS, GR, and VR
2) KLUDGY - build a schema to replace MD_DigitalTransferOptions
             contains associations - allowing for referential
attribution (xlink:href)
             for each of DI/SI, DF, RS, GR, and VR
             (refer to
http://adl.brs.gov.au/metadata/gmd/BRS_transferOptions.xsd)
3) ACCEPTABLE - build a schema to replace MD_Metadata that contains a
[0..*] association to a new class
                 build new class that relates two and only two instances
of aggregate classes (use xs:IDREF)
                 (refer to
http://adl.brs.gov.au/metadata/gmd/BRS_metadataEntity.xsd)
OUTCOMES:
1) this is feasible, does not break ISO 19115 or ISO 19139 even if it
is not acceptable
    Already in use see metadata accessible via http:/adl.brs.gov.au
2) This assumes that the only place that relationships are important is
in the MD_DigitalTransferOptions
    If metadata is delivered in this form then need to report a set of
MD_MetadataExtensionInformation
    but readily translatable into option 1 (thus no need to report a set
of MD_MetadataExtensionInformation)
3) Allows for previously undefined relationships to be described
    Bit harder to manage

QUESTION:
What next?

Cheers

e
Evert Bleys
BRS Data Manager
Biosecurity and Information Sciences
Bureau of Rural Sciences
Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry
GPO Box 855 CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601
Ph +61 (0)2 6272 5627

------IMPORTANT - This message has been issued by The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF). The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. It is your responsibility to check any attachments for viruses and defects before opening or sending them on.

Any reproduction, publication, communication, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of the information contained in this e-mail by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. The taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. If you have received this e-mail as part of a valid mailing list and no longer want to receive a message such as this one advise the sender by return e-mail accordingly. Only e-mail correspondence which includes this footer, has been authorised by DAFF
------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
GeoNetwork-devel mailing list
GeoNetwork-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geonetwork-devel
GeoNetwork OpenSource is maintained at http://sourceforge.net/projects/geonetwork

--
Roald de Wit
Software Engineer
roald.dewit@anonymised.com

Commercial Support for Open Source GIS Software
http://lisasoft.com/LISAsoft/SupportedProducts/

Hi Roald,

Roald de Wit wrote:

Hi Evert, Simon and list,

The email below is of special interest to our metadata editor project:
our client, Bureau of Rural Sciences, which is represented by Evert
wants to be able to have extensions to the standard being reflected in
the editor.

In order to have make the editor as generic as possible, our idea is the
following:

Special cases (like references to grid representations and reference
systems within digital transfer options) will be translated into an
extension XSD to the ISO 19139 that will be inserted in a local GN
instance. GN will pick up that extension automatically and will be
reflected in the 'internal representation' that is currently used for
building the current HTML form and also used as the basis for our XForm.
  
That is the way in which the profile system currently works in the BlueNet version of GeoNetwork - there are four profiles distributed with that - ANZLIC, Marine Community (MCP), World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and Australian Defence Organisation (ADO). The brs profile of 19115/19139 could be included in GN as another profile - with its schema details housed in web/geonetwork/xml/schemas/iso19139.brs - the extensions in the brs namespace (including brs:MD_Metadata) would then be picked up on startup and added to the base 19139 and any reference to a brs:MD_Metadata document would use the info from iso19139.brs.

Of course the resulting metadata document would not match the standard
and will have to be translated back into ISO 19139 at some point.
  
Yep.

The question is: which of the 3 solutions below are possible to
implement in GN and how much effort would be involved?

>From the perspective of the client, solution 3 would be best: a new
table of relationships. Would that be picked up by GN automatically?
If not, would solution 2?
  
As far as I can see they would all 'work' for the external editor project because they need only be recognised by the schema parser in GN and passed on in the base document (xml.metadata.get) and in the snippets (xml.metadata.snippet) - as you've mentioned above.

If you are asking whether they would 'work' in the existing GN editor - then yes I suspect they would appear as elements/attributes after adding the brs profile XSD (to the BlueNet GN which has basic profile support - though not yet as a plugin unfortunately). This could be made 'pretty' by some additional xslt work to handle the brs extensions including an interface to associate the TOs with the other elements (which would be an interesting task).

As for comments on which approach is best - I suppose the third one is attractive because its intention is clear (ie. declarative).

Cheers,
Simon

Thanks,

Roald

On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 15:28 +0930, Bleys, Evert - BRS wrote:
  

ISSUE:
How to deal with specific instances of one class that refer to only one
instance of another class.

Context
ISO 19115 / ISO 19139 allows for multiple instances of a range of
classes.
ISO 19115 (non-exclusive list)
MD_Metadata has spatialRepresentationInfo [0..*], referenceSystemInfo
[0..1], identificationInfo [1..*], etc
MD_Distribution has distributionFormat [C..*], transferOptions [0..*],
etc
[ISO19139 allows for @id in the associated class for each of these]

USE CASE:
A record may contain more than one MD_Identification -
MD_DataIdentification (DI), or SV_ServiceIdentification (SI)
   When describing a closely coupled service this is logical
(conditionality of srv:operateOn)
       (other cases are less obvious)
In one metadata record there could (often should be):
   more than one MD_DigitalTransferOption(TO)
   more than one MD_Format (DF)
   more than one spatial Representation - MD_GridSpatialRepresenation
(GR), MD_VectorSpatialRepresenation (VR), etc
   more than one MD_ReferenceSystem (RS)

PROBLEM:
   How to relate a specific TO with the appropriate DI/SI, DF, RS, GR,
and VR

SOLUTIONS:
1) UGLY - build a @id in TO that when parsed yields the appropriate
DI/SI, DF, RS, GR, and VR
2) KLUDGY - build a schema to replace MD_DigitalTransferOptions
             contains associations - allowing for referential
attribution (xlink:href)
             for each of DI/SI, DF, RS, GR, and VR
             (refer to
http://adl.brs.gov.au/metadata/gmd/BRS_transferOptions.xsd)
3) ACCEPTABLE - build a schema to replace MD_Metadata that contains a
[0..*] association to a new class
                 build new class that relates two and only two instances
of aggregate classes (use xs:IDREF)
                 (refer to
http://adl.brs.gov.au/metadata/gmd/BRS_metadataEntity.xsd)
OUTCOMES:
1) this is feasible, does not break ISO 19115 or ISO 19139 even if it
is not acceptable
    Already in use see metadata accessible via http:/adl.brs.gov.au
2) This assumes that the only place that relationships are important is
in the MD_DigitalTransferOptions
    If metadata is delivered in this form then need to report a set of
MD_MetadataExtensionInformation
    but readily translatable into option 1 (thus no need to report a set
of MD_MetadataExtensionInformation)
3) Allows for previously undefined relationships to be described
    Bit harder to manage

QUESTION:
What next?

Cheers

e
Evert Bleys
BRS Data Manager
Biosecurity and Information Sciences
Bureau of Rural Sciences
Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry
GPO Box 855 CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601
Ph +61 (0)2 6272 5627

------IMPORTANT - This message has been issued by The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF). The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. It is your responsibility to check any attachments for viruses and defects before opening or sending them on.

Any reproduction, publication, communication, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of the information contained in this e-mail by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. The taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. If you have received this e-mail as part of a valid mailing list and no longer want to receive a message such as this one advise the sender by return e-mail accordingly. Only e-mail correspondence which includes this footer, has been authorised by DAFF
------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
GeoNetwork-devel mailing list
GeoNetwork-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
geonetwork-devel List Signup and Options
GeoNetwork OpenSource is maintained at GeoNetwork - Geographic Metadata Catalog download | SourceForge.net