search

opengeospatial / ogcapi-records

An open standard for the discovery of geospatial resources on the Web.
https://ogcapi.ogc.org/records
Other
60 stars 27 forks source link

Add reference back to root to sub pages #57

Closed mhogeweg closed 4 years ago

mhogeweg commented 4 years ago

As I'm working on implementing OGC Records, I found it handy to include a reference back to the landing page in for example the conformance or collections pages. I suggest this to be included in the spec as at least an option.

See http://geoss.esri.com/ogcrecords/conformance

jvanulde commented 4 years ago

@mhogeweg is parent a valid relation? I haven't seen it before but I could be mistaken. Perhaps we can use the up relation? Agree that the reference back to the landing page is convenient.

mhogeweg commented 4 years ago

parent is used as relation type for example in a STAC item along with self, root, collection, derived_from, and alternate. If the collection intended there is analogous to the collection in OGC API, that would also be a relationship type to include.

cportele commented 4 years ago

parent is not a registered link relation type, but up is.

In Features there was an issue/discussion about this some time ago. See https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogcapi-features/issues/181. The consensus was that implementations are free to add such links, but we did not see a good reason to require them.

mhogeweg commented 4 years ago

Fair point, but neither are collections or conformance and those are already identified in the spec here. I see collection is a type and profile is defined as "Identifying that a resource representation conforms to a certain profile, without affecting the non-profile semantics of the resource representation." api is also not a type, but IANA does have service-desc defined as "Identifies service description for the context that is primarily intended for consumption by machines".

Should api, collections, and conformance then also be reconsidered?

see https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml

cportele commented 4 years ago

Should collections and conformance then also be reconsidered?

Features has specified items, data and conformance as new link relation types (not collections), because we did not find one that is registered. Since these are generic terms, IANA will not register them (at least unless they are defined in an IETF or W3C standard). Going forward, all unregistered link relation types in OGC API standards will be URIs, managed by the OGC Naming Authority. There was a recent TC vote on this after some discussion in Common and the OGC NA.

pvretano commented 4 years ago

19-OCT-2020: This was discussed in features and it was determined that this is not essential information for many use cases (i.e. being at a leaf and jumping all the way back to the landing page) although we don't prevent people from including those links if they want to do so.

mhogeweg commented 4 years ago

As long as a future compliance test indeed 'allows' those additional convenience links, that's good.