Re: ISA Core Location Vocabulary

On 2013-12-22 1:53, Andrea Perego wrote:
> Thanks, Ghislain.
>
> Actually, the approach adopted in the Core Location Vocabulary was to 
> allow the use of any kind of geometry encoding/representation (so, 
> yes, Frans, also the NeoGeo voc is supported, even though it is not 
> included in the examples). The point was that there was no agreement 
> in the group about the best way to represent geometries. Rather, the 
> group recognised that this depends on the specific use case.
>
> I wonder whether which are views in the CG on this issue.

I think that in the end we need one commonly used way to encode 
geometry. The vocabulary now allows any kind of encoding that was ever 
invented. That allows for freedom to adapt to existing systems, but it 
does not help interoperability much. So I think it would be a good idea 
to try to agree on a best practice for encoding geometry in this group.

With regard to interoperability of INSPIRE data: Isn't geometry 
generally defined as GM_Object (from ISO 19107)  in INSPIRE?  And 
shouldn't that mean that any geometry encoding should support all 
subtypes of GM_Object?

Regards,
Frans

>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrea
>

Received on Monday, 23 December 2013 12:22:06 UTC