Finalize/vet XML header & namespace references, spec. unversioned GML ref

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think there are still some issues related to namespace references in the 
"header" of the 3 core templates. I'm sure we can resolve these fairly quickly, 
so let's do it. Specifically:

1. In GetCap, swe and om namespaces are specified, but never used. Should they 
be removed?

2. In GetObs, swe namespace reference pointed to version 1.0. I've seen 
indications that 1.0.1 is more appropriate, and changed it to that. Any 
objections?

3. More importantly, GML points to an unversioned reference, 
http://www.opengis.net/gml. This is ambiguous and may be an issue.

For example, in a comment about this from Jan 2012, Ted Habermann said: "GML 
Schema – most of the capabilities documents I looked at used an unspecified 
version of the GML schema as a namespace 
(xmlns:gml=http://www.opengis.net/gml). Unfortunately, the GML group is leading 
an effort to add version numbers to namespaces. It used to be that a namespace 
without a version pointed to the most recent version, that is also causing 
problems."

As far as I know, the "1.0" SOS/OM/SWE standards we're using was designed to go 
with GML 3.1. But http://www.opengis.net/gml points to 3.2. Changing the 
namespace to a versioned reference leads to multiple gml-related validation 
errors. Also, no resource exists at http://www.opengis.net/gml/3.1.1 and 
http://www.opengis.net/gml/3.1, while /3.2 and /3.2.1 both point to a valid 
resource (http://schemas.opengis.net/gml/3.2.1/gml.xsd).

Comments?

(Note that I've created a new folder for the 3 "core" templates that I'm 
updating. They're at:
http://code.google.com/p/ioostech/source/browse/#svn%2Ftrunk%2Ftemplates%2FMiles
tone1.0
GetCap is essentially unchanged, but GetObs and DescrSensor do have substantial 
updates relative to the previous, old templates. I want to finish polishing a 
large block of the GetObs template before soliciting comments, then do the same 
for the DescrSensor template.)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by emilioma...@gmail.com on 24 Jun 2012 at 8:29

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Ignore #3, the GML issue. After lots of discussions on the mailing list (see 
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/ioostech_dev/82uONzdUyq4/discussion), it's 
clear that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the current usage, and no 
practical change that would make Ted Haberman's concern go away.

But I'd still like to get your input on #1 and #2.

Original comment by emilioma...@gmail.com on 25 Jun 2012 at 9:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The following changes to the GetCap and GetObs templates have been applied or 
accepted:

1. In GetCap, swe namespace was removed, as it was never used. om namespace was 
retained because it's used in the 
/sos:Capabilities/sos:Contents/sos:ObservationOfferingList/sos:ObservationOfferi
ng/sos:resultModel value, and removing it gave a validation error.

2. In GetObs, swe namespace refers to version 1.0.1.

3. In both templates, gml namespace was retained as an unversioned reference. 
This was confirmed to be ok; the om 1.0 schema defines GML 3.1.1 as the version 
used.

See additional discussions on this issue on the ioostech_dev list, on this 
thread:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/ioostech_dev/82uONzdUyq4/discussion

Original comment by emilioma...@gmail.com on 30 Jun 2012 at 5:26

• Changed state: Done