I have a colleague who wishes to describe related tables (from relational databases) with associated geometries. In other words, he wants to describe what is in columns in the attribute table of a dataset.
His test case is a simple shapefile where, for each feature, there are columns for percent-agriculture, percent-developed, population, etc. The description of each attribute should include units, data sources, temporal bounds, etc.
I think that we could create an ISO19110 record and then have ISO19119/19139 child records for each of the attributes. Seems like that could get pretty ugly. Then I was also thinking we just add additional data quality sections for each attribute.
I don't have anything that complex in my GeoNetwork instance. Does anyone have an example of something similar that they've done that I can show him for an example?
Kathy
Hi Kathy,
you have 2 examples here
http://sdi.eea.europa.eu/catalogue/srv/eng/catalog.search#/search?sortBy=relevance&from=1&to=20&fast=index&_content_type=json&type=featureCatalog
One for a raster and one for a vector datasource.
If using iso19139, you'll have to create a separate feature catalog using
iso19110 and then link the 2 records. In coming iso19115-3, the 2 could be
combined in one record.
Also, to help on creating feature catalog, Talend ETL could be an option
see https://github.com/talend-spatial/workspace-metadata-crawler/
HTH
Francois
2015-08-24 21:45 GMT+02:00 Kathy Koch <kkoch@anonymised.com>:
I have a colleague who wishes to describe related tables (from relational
databases) with associated geometries. In other words, he wants to
describe what is in columns in the attribute table of a dataset.
His test case is a simple shapefile where, for each feature, there are
columns for percent-agriculture, percent-developed, population, etc. The
description of each attribute should include units, data sources, temporal
bounds, etc.
I think that we could create an ISO19110 record and then have
ISO19119/19139 child records for each of the attributes. Seems like that
could get pretty ugly. Then I was also thinking we just add additional
data quality sections for each attribute.
I don't have anything that complex in my GeoNetwork instance. Does anyone
have an example of something similar that they've done that I can show him
for an example?
Kathy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
GeoNetwork-users mailing list
GeoNetwork-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geonetwork-users
GeoNetwork OpenSource is maintained at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/geonetwork
There is also lot of feature catalog examples in here
https://metadata.agiv.be/zoekdienst/apps/tabsearch/index.html?hl=eng
Cheers.
Francois
2015-08-25 6:10 GMT+02:00 Francois Prunayre <fx.prunayre@anonymised.com>:
Hi Kathy,
you have 2 examples here
http://sdi.eea.europa.eu/catalogue/srv/eng/catalog.search#/search?sortBy=relevance&from=1&to=20&fast=index&_content_type=json&type=featureCatalog
One for a raster and one for a vector datasource.
If using iso19139, you'll have to create a separate feature catalog using
iso19110 and then link the 2 records. In coming iso19115-3, the 2 could be
combined in one record.
Also, to help on creating feature catalog, Talend ETL could be an option
see https://github.com/talend-spatial/workspace-metadata-crawler/
HTH
Francois
2015-08-24 21:45 GMT+02:00 Kathy Koch <kkoch@anonymised.com>:
I have a colleague who wishes to describe related tables (from relational
databases) with associated geometries. In other words, he wants to
describe what is in columns in the attribute table of a dataset.
His test case is a simple shapefile where, for each feature, there are
columns for percent-agriculture, percent-developed, population, etc. The
description of each attribute should include units, data sources, temporal
bounds, etc.
I think that we could create an ISO19110 record and then have
ISO19119/19139 child records for each of the attributes. Seems like that
could get pretty ugly. Then I was also thinking we just add additional
data quality sections for each attribute.
I don't have anything that complex in my GeoNetwork instance. Does
anyone have an example of something similar that they've done that I can
show him for an example?
Kathy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
GeoNetwork-users mailing list
GeoNetwork-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geonetwork-users
GeoNetwork OpenSource is maintained at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/geonetwork