[Requests] CSW2 AP ISO (RFPC 35) Response

Marc Gilles Marc.Gilles at spacebel.be
Mon Apr 24 10:08:53 EDT 2006

Part A is to be completed once per evaluator per comment submission.  Please
iterate over Part B as needed. 

 1. Evaluator: 

Marc Gilles 


I. Vandammestraat 5-7
B-1560 Hoeilaart

marc.gilles at spacebel.be <mailto:marc.gilles at spacebel.be> 

 2. Submission: OGC Request 35: OpenGIS(r) Catalogue Services Specification
2.0.1 (with Corrigendum) - ISO Metadata Application Profile (CSW2 AP ISO):
Request for Public Comments  

 1. Specification Section number: [Annex C]

 2. Criticality: [MAJOR] 

 3. Comments/justifications for changes: [COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS] 

    The WSDL file can not be valided using  XMLSpy 2006 Enterprise Edition:

     In the ApIso-interfaces.wsdl, at line

       <xsd:import namespace="http://www.opengis.net/cat/csw"

    It generates the following error message:

    The target namespace 'http://www.opengis.net/cat/csw' of the <import>
definition must differ from  namespace

   'http://www.opengis.net/cat/csw'  of the enclosing schema.

   Can you publish the WSDL file that can be validated by recent version of
popular XML tools ?


 1. Specification Section number: [] Response

 2. Criticality: [MAJOR] 

 3. Comments/justifications for changes: [COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS] 

    The two following sentences are confusing:

"The actual records returned by the catalogue are a substitute of the
element <csw:AbstractRecord>.... "

and then after

"Catalogue services implementing this application profile MUST NOT
substitute <csw:AbstractRecord> but rather <xs:any> with XML documents that
comply with one of the schemas defined in Annex D "

Can you explain the specific purpose of these two fields in the choice : 


          <xsd:element ref="csw:AbstractRecord" minOccurs="0"

          <xsd:any namespace="##other" processContents="strict"
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>



 1. Specification Section number: [] Response  & 8.4.3

 2. Criticality: [MAJOR] 

 3. Comments/justifications for changes: [COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS] 

   [] Response   

   What do we do if in our existing catalogues we have metadata fields which
can not fit in the current schemas definitions  "MD_Metadata_Type" in Annex
    Is there an extension/customization  mechanism foreseen to allow to add
new fields or customize Metadata definitions to better fit with specific
catalogue needs ? 
    That seems to be suggested by the sentence:  "<SearchResults> element is
a generic XML container".
    Can we then replace the schema in annex D by ours ? following which
constraints ?
    Regarding [8.4.3], it seems that what annex D provides, are  examples
and not mandatory schemas.  
    Can you clarify what should be the approach to make an existing
catalogue CSW 2.0 ISO compliant ?




The present message may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information.
If you are not the intended addressee and in case of a transmission error,
please notify the sender immediately and destroy this E-mail. 
Disclosure, reproduction or distribution of this document and its possible 
attachments is strictly forbidden.

SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper, inaccurate, intercepted, 
(partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission of the current information 
given that unencrypted electronic transmission cannot currently be guaranteed 
to be secure or error free. Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual 
agreements, an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm 
the information contained in this E-mail.

SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private use.

SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that might corrupt this 
message and/or your computer system.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mail.opengeospatial.org/mailman/private/requests/attachments/20060424/bd85bfe5/attachment.html

More information about the Requests mailing list