[Requests] Comments on OGC PipelineML 18-073r1

Dimitri Sarafinof Dimitri.Sarafinof at ign.fr
Mon Jan 7 10:40:33 EST 2019


PART A

1. Evaluator:
Dimitri Sarafinof
dimitri.sarafinof at ign.fr

2. Submission: [OpenGIS Project Document Number, Name]
OGC PipelineML 18-073r1

PART B

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
2 Conformance

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Editorial

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
It is not clear whether the GML encoding is mandatory or not and if other encodings are allowed. I understood that this version mandates only a GML encoding but maybe later versions will allow more encoding formats. If it is correct, maybe it should be mentioned here.

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
3 References

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Technical

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
Mention is made to ISO 19115:2003 which is deprecated

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
General

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
General

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
Although ISO 19115-3 is mentioned, it is not clear that it is used in this standard

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
Figure 6

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Technical

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
the class PMLDataset should make more use of ISO 19115-1 (CI_Citation)

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
7.1

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
General

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
How do the other use case articulate with this one ? An overarching schema of the 3 use cases would be appreciated.

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
Figure 8

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Technical

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
Code, name and comment seem to be general attributes. Consider creating on overarching object containing general attributes. Use ISO 19115-1 if possible

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
General

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Technical

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
Looking at the multiplicity, it appears that a dataset, a pipeline or an assembly can be void. Shouldn't a dataset have at least one element ? A pipeline at least an assembly and an assembly a component ?

In the chapter 7.5.1.1 it is required that : If a Pipeline feature is defined, it SHALL contain one or more Assembly Classes. But multiplicity is 0..*. Consider reviewing the multiplicities

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
Figure 7

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Editorial

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
The class appurtenantComponent is in the Figure 6 but is explained below Figure 7. Either add this class to Figure 7 or move its description to Figure 6

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
General

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
General

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
There is no mention of quality is the specification. Consider adding a reference to ISO 19157, at least at the PMLDataset level (lineage, dataquality report...).

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
General

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
General

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
There is no mention of ISO 19148 on linear referencing nor with CityGML ADE on utility network. Consider complying with these standards

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
7.5.1.4

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Major

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
Definition of 'location' is not clear enough, in particular to what refers in "0, 1, or 2 spatial dimensions"? Are these the dimension of the geometry used for the location ?

1. Requirement: [General, #]
General

2. Implementation Specification Section number: [General, #]
7.5.1.4

3. Criticality: [Major, Minor, Editorial, etc.]
Major

4. Comments/justifications for changes: [Comments]
Appurtenant Component Location Methods are well described but it's not trivial how to feed  these information into the model. Please clarify.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/requests/attachments/20190107/5c633362/attachment.html>


More information about the Requests mailing list