Marc Leobet For French Point of Contact Gathering a 10 000 puzzle pieces in French SDI : first look back
To learn from past experiences <ul><li>Coordination </li></ul><ul><li>Network of services </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata and C...
You said coordination? <ul><li>A three level organisation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local ...
<ul><li>At national level : two tools under State authority </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Géocatalogue </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>...
Metadata <ul><li>Priority of the Year for public authorities producing data sets under Annex I </li></ul><ul><li>Open and ...
<ul><li>To offer to all stake-holders a validation tool for metadata. </li></ul><ul><li>2008-Géosource V2) : integrating s...
Issues of coherence in Europe <ul><li>Difference beetween Géosource and JRC’s tool </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Implemented only ...
First reporting (15 th  of May) <ul><li>A decision : to be based on network of services (ie. Géocatalogue) </li></ul><ul><...
Comitology <ul><li>Drive to a good network, highly mobilized on defending their uses and needs </li></ul><ul><li>Exchangin...
Interoperability of Annex II & III themes <ul><li>A wider range of SDIC/LMO </li></ul><ul><li>Some advices : </li></ul><ul...
Conclusions <ul><li>The number of French public authorities leads to : </li></ul><ul><li>Protect and upgrade existing coor...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Gathering a 10 000 puzzle pieces in French SDI : first look back

1,116 views

Published on

A point about INSPIRE implementation at the beginning of 2010, and the issue of public authorities in France.

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Gathering a 10 000 puzzle pieces in French SDI : first look back

  1. 1. Marc Leobet For French Point of Contact Gathering a 10 000 puzzle pieces in French SDI : first look back
  2. 2. To learn from past experiences <ul><li>Coordination </li></ul><ul><li>Network of services </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata and Conformity </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting </li></ul><ul><li>Comitology, maintenance and Annex III </li></ul>
  3. 3. You said coordination? <ul><li>A three level organisation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Regional </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Organisations are different because history of local relationships are different </li></ul><ul><li>It worth, so there will be no national legal framework </li></ul><ul><li>The national level will support regional level </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>At national level : two tools under State authority </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Géocatalogue </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Géoportail </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Which evolutions? Removing practicle obstacles </li></ul><ul><li>In line agreement to push metadata in Géocatalogue </li></ul><ul><li>Free co-visualisation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>From a metadata in Géocatalogue to a view in Géoportail </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>From view service (URL) to the Géoportail </li></ul></ul>The French Network of services
  5. 5. Metadata <ul><li>Priority of the Year for public authorities producing data sets under Annex I </li></ul><ul><li>Open and compliant tools : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Géosource (= Geonetwork with a French profile), </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A free Excel template with a ISO19115 XML export </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A Wiki dedicated to “How to fulfill metadata fields” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Géocatalogue is the official national focal point for metadata </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>To offer to all stake-holders a validation tool for metadata. </li></ul><ul><li>2008-Géosource V2) : integrating schematron language validation (ISO/IEC standard) </li></ul><ul><li>Used by the JRC tool « metadata validator » </li></ul><ul><li>Geosource V2.3 (2010) : to be closer to JRC </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Updating version to schematron code </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adding INSPIRE rules : codelist validation in french for INSPIRE themes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integration in French Géocatalogue </li></ul></ul>Metadata validation
  7. 7. Issues of coherence in Europe <ul><li>Difference beetween Géosource and JRC’s tool </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Implemented only in english for codelist validation in INSPIRE metadata validator </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Differences beetween ISO 19139 schema for gmd:language </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the « good schema »? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>We hope the official translation of « codelists register amendement to IR » will be the occasion to solve this issue. </li></ul>
  8. 8. First reporting (15 th of May) <ul><li>A decision : to be based on network of services (ie. Géocatalogue) </li></ul><ul><li>No other solution given the number of public authorities. </li></ul><ul><li>In 2009, very high disparity following themes and actors </li></ul><ul><li>For December 2010, Géocatalogue has to be fuller! </li></ul>
  9. 9. Comitology <ul><li>Drive to a good network, highly mobilized on defending their uses and needs </li></ul><ul><li>Exchanging arguments in a national CNIG “Linking Group” </li></ul><ul><li>A very strong network of readers of many communities </li></ul><ul><li>Up to now, all French positions at INSPIRE Committee were fully conformant to “Linking Group” consensus. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Interoperability of Annex II & III themes <ul><li>A wider range of SDIC/LMO </li></ul><ul><li>Some advices : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Don’t aim a perfect world! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To think to implementation : stay simple </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Think about maintenance. </li></ul></ul>Expert vision Our vision
  11. 11. Conclusions <ul><li>The number of French public authorities leads to : </li></ul><ul><li>Protect and upgrade existing coordination at regional level </li></ul><ul><li>Bet on French network of services to catch metadata and implementation informations, </li></ul><ul><ul><li>for example, it supports Monitoring and reporting tools </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Strenghten the link between experts of TWG and SDIC/LMO to get the best interoperability implementing rules for Annex II and III </li></ul>

×