Deprecate use of the IOOS Platform Vocabulary: https://mmisw.org/ont/ioos/platform in platform_vocabulary attribute

[mwengren]

Currently, the IOOS Metadata Profile platform_vocabulary attribute guidance references two external 'platform' vocabularies:

• IOOS: https://mmisw.org/ont/ioos/platform
• NERC: https://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/L06/current/

Proposal: remove the reference to the IOOS platform vocabulary and instead relying entirely on the NERC vocabulary.

Separately IOOS/DMAC would like to deprecate most of the IOOS-managed vocabularies listed at MMISW, excluding the following two vocabularies that are known to be in active use (in the IOOS MP and elsewhere):

• Sector: https://mmisw.org/ont/ioos/sector
• IOOS Core Variables: https://mmisw.org/ont/ioos/core_variable

Questions:

• Are there any other IOOS vocabularies in MMISW that RAs, other IOOS partners, or IOOS projects themselves depend on?
• How many RAs/RA datasets reference the IOOS platform vocabulary above in the platform_vocabulary attribute and what would be the impacts if it were deprecated? Get this info from Sensor Map via @srstsavage's help.
• Are there any platform terms that are in the IOOS platform vocabulary (and are used by RAs currently) that are missing from NERC?
  • [ ] If so, let's add them to NERC

List of known potential downstream impacts:

• the platform variable is used in determining the IOOS Asset Identifier for a dataset, so we should at least consider any impacts there
• ?

[MathewBiddle]

We should include references for proposing new terms to the NERC Vocabulary Server (NVS). I think they take contributions from GitHub through the respective vocabulary repository at https://github.com/nvs-vocabs. In some cases, the term would need to be proposed to the authoritative body for that vocabulary (eg. CF terms should be proposed to the CF community, then integrated into NVS)

[MathewBiddle]

FYI @laurabrenskelle