standards, standardisation & inspire status, issues, opportunities · collaboration with sdos...
Post on 13-Jul-2020
28 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Joint Research Centre
The European Commission's science
and knowledge service
http://ec.europa.eu/jrc
Standards, standardisation & INSPIRE – Status, issues, opportunities
INSPIRE Coordination Team
6th MIG meeting, 13-14 June 2017
Overview
• Standards in INSPIRE
• Collaboration with standardisation organisations
• Lessons learnt
• Discussion points
Implementing Rules (IRs), Technical Guidelines (TGs) and tools
Directive
Implementing Rules
Commission Regulation
Technical Guidelines
“What Member States must implement”
(abstract specification)
“How Member States might implement it”
(implementation specification)
TGs for the Implementation of Download Services
TGs – Data Specification on
Addresses
INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC
legally binding
not legally binding
e.g.
Tools implementing
INSPIRE requirements
INSPIRE-SOS
INSPIRE validator
Extended schemas e.g.
References to international standards
Directive
Implementing Rules
Commission Regulation
Technical Guidelines
TGs for the Implementation of Download Services
TGs – Data Specification on
Addresses
INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC
e.g.
Tools implementing
INSPIRE requirements
INSPIRE-SOS
INSPIRE validator
Extended schemas e.g.
Conceptual influence and some explicit references
to standards (mainly ISO/TC 211
& some domain-specific)
Many references to standards
(OGC, ISO/TC 211, W3C and domain-
specific)
Atom, WFS, SOS, WCS
ISO 19115, 19119, 19139
W3C DWBP
Standards used in INSPIRE
CS-W WMS, WMTS
ISO 19115, 19119, 19139
ISO 19100, OGC, domain
standards
AAA standards
Collaboration with SDOs - OGC
• EEA is OGC member since 2008 Initially participating in technical working groups (waterML, EML) Promotion of OGC standards towards Eionet (around 2010) More of an observer function in the past years
• Collaboration agreement JRC-OGC official recognition of our technical leadership of developing and
coordinating the EU SDI (INSPIRE) rights to participate in meetings and voting rights
• Regular interactions with the OGC community JRC presents INSPIRE status at all European OGC meetings JRC and MS INSPIRE experts are participating in standards and domain
WGs, interoperability experiments and testbeds
• Some interest from OGC to publish INSPIRE TGs as OGC profiles (e.g. for the view and download service TGs)
• Some change requests submitted by JRC (on behalf of the INSPIRE community) to OGC on bugs / incompatibilities
Collaboration with SDOs – ISO/TC 211 (CEN/TC 287) • JRC has a class A liaison with ISO/TC 211
can participate in meetings, but without voting rights
• JRC is hosting the ISO/TC 211 UML model repository
• Some interaction (e.g. submission of comments during revisions, active participation) with relevant ISO working groups, e.g. on Conceptual schema, common types (ISO 19103) Registers, code lists (ISO 19135) Metadata (ISO 19115, 19119) Conceptual model for addresses – development of an INSPIRE
profile (ISO 19160-1)
• CEN/TC 287 (no longer very active) class A liaison: can participate but without voting rights Active participation in drafting CEN/TR 15449-1 - Geographic
information - Spatial data infrastructures – (Parts 1-5)
Collaboration with SDOs – W3C
• JRC (as a Commission service) has an “invited expert” liaison with W3C
• Active participation in the joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web (SDW) Working Group
• Submission of comments to specific groups
W3C Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group
W3C Data Exchange Working Group
• Future relevant activities:
Joint W3C/OGC Committee (JWOC) – yet to be chartered
Lessons learnt
• Close collaboration is essential – duplication / incompatibilities must be avoided The INSPIRE work on profiling existing standards (i.e. being more
specific where standards leave a great degree of freedom) has been appreciated by the tool developers, implementers and standards community
Active engagement and participation of experts working on both sides is essential in order to influence standards – it is not enough to submit an idea
From EEA side, human resources to particpate sustainably in technical working groups as well as financial resources to co-develop apllication pilots were not there
There are pros and cons relying on standards and working with these organisations or developing INSPIRE standards. Specifications set by standard setting bodies do not only follow the needs of INSPIRE, in particular if INSPIRE experts are not actively involved in the standardisation work
Lessons learnt
• Need for bridging the gap between software implementations and standards Following standards closely is useful for Technical
Guidelines, but for legal acts, it is important to abstract from the specificities of a particular technical solution
Standards become meaningful when implemented by a critical mass of software products (ideally free and open source) – This is not always the case – see e.g. the support for GML
3.2.1 in GIS clients, which is still being addressed
ISO standards are only available against payment – this can be an obstacle for implementers (but also MIG work), when there are many references to ISO standards
Lessons learnt
• Adaptability to change Taking the web as an example, most developments
during the past years are by definition lightweight, fast and simple (and not trying to capture all possible use cases with one shot)
This is not the always the case with the majority of GI standards
The recent collaboration between OGC and W3C on Best Practices for Spatial Data on the Web is good example in this direction
Interdependence requires close collaboration and dynamic adaptations, some change requests / bug fixes take too long – http://ogc.standardstracker.org/show_request.cgi?id=435 is
still unresolved since 2010 despite several requests!
Discussion points
• Collaboration – is it efficient or can we do better? (including collaboration between all bodies)
• Streamlining of standards - do we have too many? Are we duplicating efforts or creating unnecessary complexities / competition?
• Do we (as EU) exercise sufficient influence in these bodies? If not, how can we do better?
• Future of INSPIRE (after 2020) – should we rely more or less on standards?
• Pooling resources – can we think of joint project (e.g. funding of interoperability experiments / testbeds) or more effective working methods?
top related