Meeting Notes ‐
General discussion: @ Need to confirming the bi-weekly meetings for the rest of the year: Thursdays should be ok. Timing of the agenda is incorrect due to changes in Winter/Summer time >> This time seems to be ok @send out another email invite to the list to see if this time is suitable. RA - It is not particularly good for the America's and this may be the group that should join. e.g., Image Matters - also US Fish & Wildlife who are using DCAT so they may also be interested. @ Alternate timezones can be tricky but perhaps split the meeting time for America's - Rob A. may run those at another time if there is interest. DV – Those registered may not wish to particpate directly but they did want to pay attention to updates. Type of information that needs to be collected from different parts of the world so that this paper can be updated to reflect what changes could be made to the current version of DCAT to improve the geospatial aspect The collection of information for GeoDCAT-AP for a best practice document was started some time ago (2019) but it was decided at the time to make it a discussion paper in anticipation of becoming a OGC standard.
What is described in the paper is now old. Taken from existing European projects at the time. The slide shows how the information was gathered in the paper. This is a good place to begin but it will need to be adapted. [See slide] Title: Best Practice Details: Place Organisations involved Status (test bed, production, etc) Contact person URL to the materials Focus area of 5.3
- input/ harvesting
- Publishing
- Publishing as RDF
- Information mapping Other fields included
- description of Best Practice
- approach: workflow or tooling
- results / issues encountered [a good example was given at the last OGC meeting, also described in testing]
- Conclusions were also documented What may be missing: • Challenges to implementation or testing • Implementation examples from around the world DV - where is the template going to live so that people can update with their information? DV - should there be links on this site to any current tooling that have been used for implementation? RA - we need to work with the current AP version and remove the European only requirements and THEN start with a basic Geo-DCAT of which Geo-DCATAP will be a profile of this. https://github.com/opengeospatial/GeoDCAT-SWG/blob/main/definition/geodcat-ap-geosubset.ttl DV - the thought at the time that the GeoDCAT-AP was the one that everyone was going to use. For best practice I agree that this should be a broader look at the standard RA – I have set it up so that we can do regression tests to check that Geo-DCAT AP is a true profile of the generalised Geo-DCAT. This would be supported by OGC.
- Formally describing the profile which will include a movement towards the best practice that is tested along the way. Schema’s need to match the best practice. Binding of DCAT to OGC records to match the semantic models. This way OGC-APIs will work with Geo-DCAT. BC – I like the idea of identifying existing Geo-DCAT from the AP but DCAT has progressed so how do we modernise the existing AP whilst still making Geo-DCAT aligned with the current version of D-CAT 2.0 and 3.0. RA – OGC will not decide what the Geo-DCAT elements will look like but they will support the alignment of the schemas, documentation, testing and versions. DV – previous harvesting examples included harvesting from portals that had INSPIRE profiles of 19115 and just vanilla 19115. But these examples may be needed to explain the issues RA - https://github.com/ogcincubator/geodcat-ogcapi-records/tree/master/_sources/geodcat/examples PP – What do we drop into the directory for you? Background implementation instances/examples to check that our version of GeoDCAT meet the profile –> documents, csv files with mappings, and other materials. DV – I have the impression that we need to give guidance on what is delivered. I will find one example to start the conversation to provide a template for others to submit their examples and best practices. (so they see how to do it). We need the description of what is going on to support the technical implementation. RA – does not think there are current good examples. But perhaps collect information but then look at them and then decide if there is a best practice in there. BC – I would like to start with a user story approach. Why they chose GeoDCAT and why it was implemented the way it was. Then the issues they encountered. And other business requirements. RA - human readable profiles, any machine-readable version, one or more simple examples as standalone files would be great. Particularly which part they are using. RA – Perhaps create a directory with your own README file so that you submit at the level of detail you can DV – call it Examples of Implementation (not best practice), ask for documentation or mappings etc, ask for links to any implementations etc. Then we can select a few examples for testing. Good to understand what is out there and for them to understand there are better ways to implement. Also from the examples process, we could then determine a Best Practice at a later stage. @ provide a template for acquiring examples on GitHub so that it is collected in a similar way RA - https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/ is a US Government example. DV – will ask the European implementers for their documentation. Also there will be a conference for INSPIRE and those that present. DV – Another example could come from OGC-Euorpean-DCAT consortium MS – ask Nick for his example for Aus-GeoDCAT to include in this work RA - https://resources.data.gov/schemas/dcat-us/v1.1/schema/catalog.jsonld is an example of how US Gov is mapping to GeoDCAT @RA will determine what maps to DCAT and what Geo types don’t map well which will then become GeoDCAT. PP – talked about the sharing the UK experience for the DCAT and then the Geo extensions that they thought were important. At the moment it is just the basic core (data quality measures) and not the spatial yet. RA – there are some sub-profiles that could be looked at. Eg statistical datacube, provenance, observations. There could be a lightweight CORE Geo-DCAT and then their domain profiles. DV - Before next meeting can we collect some examples so that we can discuss what the template will look like to ask further questions.
ACTIONS
- Send out meeting invite to confirm the time and dates for the ongoing meetings.
- Seek information from the mailing list about any members that are unable to attend due to the time of day/night and ask if they wish to be part of the meeting if it was held at another time (this relates to Rob A.’s offer to run an alternative time at some point – clear with Rob first)
- GeoDCAT-* examples to be collected from the SWG and to be placed in https://github.com/ogcincubator/geodcat-ogcapi-records/tree/master/_sources/geodcat. They will comprise: a. Existing business cases and/or requirements for implementation b. Documentation for users of implementation with any issues that arose with GeoDCAT-* c. *.csv mappings of metadata d. Implementation schemas e. ?
- Group will create a lock-step template for people outside the SWG to submit examples based on what the SWG comes up with in 3. In general, the scope of the SWG work will be to:
- create a core OGC GeoDCAT standard/profile of DCAT v2 and 3
- demonstrate programmatically how the core supports the existing profile GeoDCAT-AP
- seek to document a core OGC GeoDCAT and how profiles can be tested via OGC processes
- documentation of Best Practice
+++++++++++ Request from Gobe (Hobona) OGC for a code-sprint:
- need a lead person from the SWG to attend the second half of 2024 a (virtual) code sprint event on metadata
- potentially Byron will lead if we can get the timing close to the ISO TC211 meeting in Sydney
- want to propose a face-to-face either side of the 11-15 Dec ISO meeting. This could be in the form of "regional" codesprints joining virtually as well. e.g., USA/Canada, NZ/Aus, Europe, etc
- FOSS4G SotM Oceania is being held on Friday 12th November (https://osgeo-oceania.org/foss4g-sotm-oceania-conference/hobart-hub/)
From Alex Leith - organiser of the Hobart FOSS4G Oceania event -"Hey OSGeo Oceania Folks
I'm writing on behalf of a small team here in Hobart to flag our intention to hold next year's FOSS4G SotM Oceania Conference here in Tasmania, probably in November.
We are talking to venues now, and will put a full proposal and budget together in due course, but wanted to be open about our early plans.
If you'd like to be part of the committee to help organise the event, please let me know and I'll loop you in on our planning. You obviously don't need to be in Hobart to help out!
I'm really looking forward to hosting everyone in my home town and I think we're going to have a lot of fun!
Kind regards,
Alex"
- Danny Vandenbroucke (KU Leuven) proposing a March workshop in Delft to connect the catalogue based standards code sprint
- Ivana Ivanova discussion about profiles for GNSS may be of interest Name of meadata contact from Denmark - "Jan Hjelmager from Denmark, who works for the Danish gov Agency for Data Supply requested the slides as a support for his proposed improvements in their gov strategy. BTW, he is the author of ISO 19115-1:2014.." from Ivana Ivanova
- INSPIRE conference last week - GeoCat joined and they discussed catalogue and metadata issues. However there were no decisions made.
Rob has been working on a big project to re-use artifacts - have been setting up various semantic annotations for GeoDCAT mappings
Pyload being extended to handle ontologies/vocabs etc
https://github.com/ogcincubator/bblocks-stac
https://ogcincubator.github.io/iliad-apis-features/build/generateddocs/slate-build/hosted/iliad/api/features/coverage_information_model/
> DSTL running a semantic workshop that may provide a focus on the GeoDCAT and the NATO community. Potentially a thread on GeoDCAT will be funded.
============
Next steps:
Begin the conversation with the people involved and see if there are others that may want to join the code sprint.
@Byron will begin the conversation by sharing our thoughts on how to proceed with the code sprint.
============
@Marie and Danny to have a meeting about the work she is undertaking around DCAT etc
@Byron to upload the recordings to the OGC hub
@Byron will leave the dates as is and a poll will be set to determine if the times need to be changed.
11Jan->11Feb Margie is out
11 & 25 Jan Danny is out
@Rob has asked for examples of (Geo)DCAT to be made available to the OGC-incubator (?)
=====Meeting ended 6:45pmAEDT(0745UTC)============
OGC GeoDCAT SWG - Meeting Info-2.docx
OGC GeoDCAT SWG - Meeting Transcripts-2.docx
OGC GeoDCAT SWG - Meeting Transcripts-11-4-24.docx
OGC GeoDCAT SWG - Meeting Transcripts-11-4-24.docx
OGC GeoDCAT SWG - Meeting Transcripts-2.docx
OGC GeoDCAT SWG - Meeting Chat-2.docx
Attendance:
-
Byron Cochrane
-
Peter Parslow
-
Chris Little
-
Fabio Vinci
-
Christin Henzen
-
Uwe Voges
-
Rob Atkinson
-
Danny Vandenbroucke
-
Glenn Laughlin
-
Margie Smith
MEETING ACTIONS
@ Byron to look for use case drivers -- what our role is and how this group will progress
@ Danny to do the Montreal outreach -- to see who else wants to attend the meeting and present
@ Rob to chase up the UNSW venue for the November code sprint
=============================
{width="5.072916666666667in"
height="2.8309645669291337in"}
GitHub repo -- https://github.com/opengeospatial/GeoCAT-SWG/issues
Montreal meeting -- 21 July?
Byron can't be there, and the time zone is not great (1am start).
Rob A.: "i will be there - I can do a BuildingBlocks tutorial and show GeoDCAT WIP initially - and then run a hands-on for anyone who want to get deeper in at the end".
Glenn Laughlin: I am also in Montreal and would like to introduce the topic to the MarineDWG if anyone would like to 'volunteer'. We have almost a full day on the Tues (Sensor -- methane observations frameworks) and it would be great to apply this work in that context.
Peter Parslow: I will join virtually. If an overview of the ISO 19115 variants would be useful (old edition/ new edition; XML & current JSON {19115-4 -- GeoNovum is leading the design work}; relation to ISO 19157) then I could do that. The current design approach for 19115-4 |> Chris MacDonald has been working on the 19115-4 through hand-crafting Json snippits for comments by the XML crew and then reverse engineering to UML but it has not been as successful as they would like.
Danny will be at the meeting and will be able to chair.
WMO are also looking into the GeoCAT. RE: STAC implementation - Chris Little would be a good place to start to get a presentation. Also Mark McGoin (? MET office).
@ Others in the OGC are looking at this but we need to put in a call to the community to see what examples they have.
Rob A. Comments that STAC is not currently ideal -- there are inconsistencies in the schema.
Chris L. says that STAC is about discoverability rather than cataloguing.
Still trying to line up a venue but the online portion will be supported by OGC.
AGENDA will fall out of the Montreal meeting. Byron is working with Chris Body on trying to get a physical venue.
@ Rob A. has been talking to a UNSW representative regarding a venue.
IEEE data provenance are working on the Indigenous Data Sovereignty. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/2890/10318/
Peter Parslow 08:29 PM https://www.gida-global.org/ieee-provenance
Chris Little: The RDA Data Granularity WG that I mentioned has draft recommendations - very generic, but may be of interest. https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1IEFeL6Tp6z96-g_W4IlWL6HwTUQZPHpKATb4MYV9zcA
Uwe -- comment. Conceptual model should be based more on the model of the 19115 where all the thinking about the spatial resolution etc have been done and tested over time. And think of GeoDCAT-AP as an RDF implementation of the XML.
Rob -- I don't see any conflict. Just accept the 19115 definitions etc that the community feel is relevant in the GeoDCAT to build the ontology. Then when another standard comes up then those required definitions can be brought up into GeoDCAT.
Rob -- why would you change from 19115? Only if there was a technology stack change otherwise why bother.
Peter P. -- align with the ISO19115-1 (conceptual encoding) beginning with the discovery core to align with the GeoDCAT-AP
Next pull in the Data Quality...
Uwe -- what about the ISO19115-2? Answer -- if we use ISO19115-3:2023 XML implementation it should be covered.
|> In GeoDCAT we would then need Sensors, Satellites, etc (earth observations)
Rob A. -- we should take a modular approach and then you start with the core and then gradually add the EOS and other sectors -- such as DataQual.
Glenn -- asking Rob. What role do the connected systems standards take?
Rob -- We need to be systematic and start to the process of building out
test cases and then see what happens when you take a record described by
a bunch of standards and chose the best standard to map to/from -- eg
choose 19115 and model everything else to that.
*RDA Plenary is coming up to endorse the 7 recommendations for archiving data -- The WG on Data Granularity
Data Citation and dynamic data and ... https://www.rd-alliance.org/plenaries/data-granularity-guidance-final-outputs-their/
MEETING ACTIONS
@ Byron to look for use case drivers -- what our role is and how this group will progress
@ Danny to do the Montreal outreach -- to see who else wants to attend the meeting and present
@ Rob to chase up the UNSW venue for the November code sprint