GEOSS, INSPIRE, GMES, SEIS interoperability issues

| Share

Page navigation

Click and drag the page title to change the order
Pages home > Data Harmonisation and Semantic Interoperability (GIGAS Technology Watch)

Data Harmonisation and Semantic Interoperability (GIGAS Technology Watch)

The Data Harmonisation and Semantic Interoperability Technical Note [RD13] describes the approaches to the topic within INSPIRE, GEOSS and GMES, the standards organisations (OGC, ISO/TC 211 and CEN/TC 287) and, where known and relevant, in FP6/FP7 projects. For GMES the three components space, in-situ and services are covered.

The lack of interoperability on the data level has been identified as a priority item for GIGAS. The data-related interoperability issues can be separated into two levels:

  • interoperability on the semantic level
  • interoperability on the syntactic level

Both are addressed in the technology watch report.

Data interoperability has many facets and requires agreements on many aspects. Therefore the technology watch summarises the approaches of the initiatives, standards organisations and projects with respect to 26 individual aspects, the so-called data interoperability components:

  • Terminology
  • Reference model
  • Architectural support for data interoperability
  • Rules for application schemas and feature catalogues
  • Application schemas
  • Ontologies
  • Spatial and temporal aspects
  • Coordinate referencing and units of measurement model
  • Identifier management
  • Object referencing
  • Multi-lingual text and cultural adaptability
  • Data transformation model / guidelines
  • Portrayal
  • Maintenance of information about geographic data
  • Publication of information about geographic data
  • Metadata for discovery, evaluation and use
  • Maintenance of data
  • Data & information quality
  • Delivery of data
  • Consistency between data
  • Multiple representations
  • Data capturing rules
  • Conformance
  • Governance
  • Extension points

The report indicates several opportunities with respect to the approaches regarding data interoperability components. These will be analysed in more detail in the comparative analysis:

  • COMMON FOUNDATION: For cross-initiative interoperability general agreements on the data interoperability components would be helpful.
  • COHERENT THEMATIC VIEW: Where a theme / domain is relevant for multiple initiatives the relevant data specification(s) should be synchronised or - even better - adopted jointly.
  • RESEARCH AGENDA AND TESTBEDS: Currently available operational technologies generally require detailed agreements and harmonised data specifications. Looser approaches e.g. based on ontologies, might be used to bridge differences with fewer agreements required in advance. However, these technologies are not considered mature.
  • INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENTS: For a sustainable approach, we need more than documents, i.e. operational components that facilitate the use of common data-related resources.
  • STRATEGY FOR EVOLUTION: Maintenance processes and approaches to backwards compatibility need to be analysed across initiatives to identify if/how interoperability can be achieved on a sustainable basis, not only at a specific point in time.
  • PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE: The infrastructure should be designed to be able to outlive any particular technology. Therefore, the specifications should be implementable in different technology platforms.
  • EDUCATION, CAPACITY BUILDING, TRAINING: The approach to architectural coherence introduces multiple layers (see in particular the Common Foundation above). In order to gain acceptance in the various communities and prepare them, capacity building is essential.

Download full document from GIGAS

 

, , , ,

inspire, gmes, geoss

Last updated 2827 days ago by Simon Cox