search

agiorguk / gemini

Resources relating to the UK Gemini metadata profile
5 stars 3 forks source link

2020-02: “Which metadata should be inherited by individual elements/features/entities within the dataset?” (asked by Nick Nisbet, April 2018) #24

Closed PeterParslow closed 1 week ago

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

clarify this in GEMINI somewhere

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

Can’t generally infer anything; perhaps best not to say anything! Or a general ‘disclaimer’ to put in the general guidelines

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

https://www.agi.org.uk/agi-groups/standards-committee/uk-gemini/40-gemini/1037-uk-gemini-standard-and-inspire-implementing-rules already said “not everything in a GEMINI record can be assumed to be true individually for each feature instance in the resource”

6footdestiny commented 3 years ago

I think the informal pictorial UML class relationship might help address this. The class diagram should be added to the document.

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

Sean: does this cause a problem to anyone else? Jo: looking at feature level metadata, so this may come up - but hasn't yet. Logically, restrictions would apply. James P: surely everything in the metadata must apply to each instance? Peter: perhaps not quality statements

Could we allow / comment that a GEMINI record is at the dataset level, but that the same elements can be used (with different hierarchyLevel) for feature instance metadata?

Strengthen the statement in the 'home page' that GEMINI is about dataset discovery metadata; mention that some elements can be use at the instance level, but this is not the scope of GEMINI.

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

Peter to draft wording; once the words are agreed, it can go straight to publication, not needing to wait for a release.

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

Existing statement:

Note that GEMINI (and the INSPIRE Guidance) are about metadata for datasets, series, and services (collectively, 'resources'); not everything in a GEMINI record can be assumed to be true individually for each feature instance in the resource. The underlying ISO standards (19115, 19139) do allow for metadata at the instance level

I recommend adding:

, so the elements could be used to describe metadata for that, but the guidance here may not be appropriate and the resulting record could not be validated as a GEMINI (or INSPIRE) record.

Revised page attached (as a Word file): 1037-uk-gemini-standard 2-3 revised.docx

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

See https://github.com/agiorguk/gemini/issues/31, a DD3 suggestion which would affect the same page. Perhaps we should resolve that one too to avoid sending two revisions of the same page to the AGI support company too close together?

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

Included in marked up file added to pending and emailed to AGI web support company to replace https://www.agi.org.uk/gemini/40-gemini/1037-uk-gemini-standard-and-inspire-implementing-rules/

PeterParslow commented 3 years ago

We had agreed not to close until it goes live, and this hasn't even been published yet.

PeterParslow commented 9 months ago

1037-uk-gemini-introduction.html was created during migration to GitHub publication, but is not currently used.

If the AGI site redirected to https://agiorguk.github.io/gemini/1037-uk-gemini-introduction.html rather than https://agiorguk.github.io/gemini/1037-uk-gemini-standard-and-inspire-implementing-rules.html, and all other pages "return to GEMINI 2.3 home page" links were to 1037-uk-gemini-introduction.html then:

a) this & #31 would be fixed b) 1037-uk-gemini-standard-and-inspire-implementing-rules.html would be redundant & deleted.

I think 1050 is the only page that doesn't have a "return to" link.