[Geopackage] Historical question on metadata
jeffy at imagemattersllc.com
Fri Apr 20 17:22:46 EDT 2018
OK, I get it now. I haven't actually seen an example of many-to-many
metadata in the wild so I didn't know that was possible.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 3:51 PM, Paul Daisey via Geopackage <
geopackage at lists.opengeospatial.org> wrote:
> Pepijn has it right; the GeoPackage v1.0 metadata model had two tables
> following a common relational database design for implementing many to many
> relationships, which were needed to implement the hierarchical metadata
> model defined in ISO 19115. One metadata record can apply to many data
> items (tables / rows / columns or any subset thereof), and one data item
> can be described by many metadata records (e.g. from different sources).
> Paul Daisey
> On 4/20/2018 3:19 PM, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt via Geopackage wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
> Which tables do you mean exactly? gpkg_metadata and
> One stores the metadata itself; the other is the association relationship
> between the metadata and the data it describes. Splitting the two allows
> reuse of metadata for multiple tables.
> If I remember correctly, Paul Daisy did most of the work on metadata so he
> might be able to give you a better answer.
> On 20 Apr 2018, at 21:10, Jeff Yutzler via Geopackage <geopackage at lists.
> opengeospatial.org> wrote:
> Hello list.
> Does anyone out there remember why we have two separate metadata tables as
> part of the Metadata Extension (this was originally part of core)? I am
> trying to produce guidance for this extension and as far as I can tell,
> there is a 1:1 mapping between the two tables. Am I missing something?
> Jeff Yutzler
> Image Matters LLC <http://www.imagemattersllc.com/>
> Mobile: (703) 981-8753
> Paul Daisey 301-651-7148
Image Matters LLC <http://www.imagemattersllc.com/>
Mobile: (703) 981-8753
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Geopackage