INSPIRE Thematic Clusters

  • Files
  • Geology
  • Final v7 version of INSPIRE Geology TG to go to MIG-T at end October 2017 for approval

Final v7 version of INSPIRE Geology TG to go to MIG-T at end October 2017 for approval

161 Views

See tracked changes, now includes the dozens of GeochronologicEraValue  older and younger  boundary value changes required to correct the ICS 2008 values that were accidentally left in the document after the decision to use ICS 2012 was required in the legal IR document. These changes need to be copied across to the registry as the values used there in e.g. the EGDI project are incorrect and the exactmatch IUGS-CGI values in the sissvoc registry (resource.geosciml.org now hosted by Geoscience Australia long term) are correct for 2012. This v7 version updated with a few extra typos spotted by Tomas Lindberg. Many thanks Tomas.

Comments

  • 149 Views
    Aurete PEREIRA

    Hello Tim

    I've just red the document (trackchanges proposed) and my name was on it. I think you've made a mistake it was not me....

  • 139 Views
    Aurete PEREIRA

    I'm sorry...I think it's the SW who add it when I refresh the revisions at the reviewing pane.

  • 535 Views
  • 540 Views
    Aurete PEREIRA

    I wasn't able to go to the INSPIRE Conference this year but hope still can contribute to the revisions of the TG for Geology namely with adds to the Lithology vocabulary. LNEG and IGME are working together to harmonize the geological Map from Spain and Portugal and we both agree that the terms "chert" and "jasper" are missing. We surely can use the term non-clastic siliceous sedimentary rock but if we do so we consider that there are loss of information. Why aren't those terms present in the vocabulary?

  • 859 Views
    Tomas LINDBERG

    Hi Tim,

    just had a quick look and found a few what I think is inconsistencies:

    latePleistocene - should this be upperPleistocene?(other ages use upper instead of late, name and definition should be altered to conform)

    middle - should this be middlePleistocene?

    cromerian - a lot of citation marks?

    Holocene subdivisions - missing real definitions and boundaries

    But it's hard to know if this is errors or intended, is there a correct register to compare with? You point to Geoscience Australia at sissvoc, but I can't find a geochronology vocabulary there (only general geology terms). Am I missing something in the interface?

  • 427 Views
    Tim Duffy

    Dear Tomas - yes all these errors spotted by you can be said to be intended if you go to the master document for these values which is the 2012 pdf from the ICS site at  http://www.stratigraphy.org/ICSchart/ChronostratChart2012.pdf

    so many thanks Tomas they are now incorporated into v7 here and Carlo will take this forward with Robert Tomas next week (Carlo will also remind us how to get the 2012 age vocab on the sissvoc - all the year variants are there but the interface defaults to showing  the latest i.e. 2016 and there is a too clever way to ask for the 2012 one....). He will also discuss with Robert why the geophysics schema (not the uml - that does not need fixing) cannot have it's minor? error fixed (that Laszlo reported 900+ days ago as the chair of the original geophysics committee - and nobody has disagreed with his proposed fix on the cluster since) and this would mean no geophysics words need changing in the TG which is what Laszlo would prefer.

    Ola Aurete! - congratulations  on your progress on  the Spanish-Portuguese map.

    There is no response from the team that designed the INSPIRE lithology list as to why they decided on using one term for the two you wish to express but as you recognised the two terms can be mapped to one with a loss of information. The issue is there is always a loss of such discriminatory information as you move to higher interoperability across Europe i.e. for INSPIRE services. So it is great in fact that you only find (perhaps so far!)  one desire to express two terms when one covers them in the list. The long term (up to 2020) solution is to get your 'loca'l national INSPIRE registry to serve new local (for the country - could be either Spain or Portugal!) such codes as URI's then under INSPIRE rules they are allowed to be used as formal extensions of the recommended INSPIRE lithology codelist.  Now at the recent INSPIRE conference there was German Lander Regional geological survey present who wanted to add literally 100's of his local codes - that were more specific to his region to the INSPIRE recommended list. So this was  explained to him and he found out that his German Federal registry would be ready to serve his submitted to them code uri's by the end of 2018 (with the deadline for all this working remember 2020) so that he could populate detailed data with the detailed more local codes - more detailed information of course but with lower interoperability across wider than his local area - such as wider across the EU.

    Hope helps - Obrigado!

    Tim - now a dual-nationality citizen, my new nationality stays in the EU - I am Irish! 

  • 414 Views
    Aurete PEREIRA

    Hello Tim

    Congrats on your new dual-nationality citizen! And sim muito obrigado for your explanation it helps who are "in the field" doing the work, the feelling is "I'm not alone...". Welcome and thank you very much for all your work for the INSPIRE cause.

    Portugal is working on the Registry Service and we hope it up and runing till the end of 2018!

    Best regards