Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

coverage_content_type #591

Open
akrishnan1 opened this issue Jun 14, 2018 · 8 comments
Open

coverage_content_type #591

akrishnan1 opened this issue Jun 14, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

@akrishnan1
Copy link

The ACDD 1.3 check currently does not validate the coverage_content_type attribute values against the controlled codelist at
https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=ISO_19115_and_19115-2_CodeList_Dictionaries#MD_CoverageContentTypeCode

Some of the files that I tested had the coverage_content_type listed as "auxiliaryInformation" and those still passed the check

@Bobfrat
Copy link
Contributor

Bobfrat commented Jun 14, 2018

Great catch. We do actually check that but we probably created that list from here, where there is the same misspelling you're reporting:

http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Attribute_Convention_for_Data_Discovery_1-3#coverage_content_type

For reference
https://github.com/ioos/compliance-checker/blob/master/compliance_checker/acdd.py#L699-L712

@Bobfrat
Copy link
Contributor

Bobfrat commented Jun 14, 2018

Or is the misspelling is actually on the ISO end? I don't think auxillary is a word.

@akrishnan1
Copy link
Author

That's right. How should this be resolved, then? Personally, I think we should keep it the way it has been spelled in the ISO document.

@Bobfrat
Copy link
Contributor

Bobfrat commented Jun 14, 2018

I suppose it would be prudent to let someone know of the misspelling and inconsistency between ESIP site and the ISO document. Not sure exactly who to talk to. @jbosch-noaa any ideas?

One option is we could accept both spellings in the compliance checker.

@akrishnan1
Copy link
Author

I have sent an email to the ESIP mailing list. Will wait for folks to weigh in.

@mwengren
Copy link
Member

Maybe @amilan17 has some insight into it. Most NOAA metadata seems to refer to the ISO Codelists hosted at NCEI (formerly NGDC at these URLs: https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/emma/xsd/schema/resources/Codelist/gmxCodelists.xml#MD_CoverageContentTypeCode ) as linked from the GEO-IDE wiki, but I know these are in the process of moving to a new home/URL.

But perhaps this error is in the official ISO codelists as well, not just the NOAA ones, I honestly don't know where to find those offhand.

@akrishnan1
Copy link
Author

I found an official copy of the ISO 19115-1 document and I see the typo in it as well.

@benjwadams
Copy link
Contributor

Have any conclusions been reached regarding the accepted values?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants