[auscope-geosciml] GeoSciML3 Borehole Collar [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dale.Percival at ga.gov.au Dale.Percival at ga.gov.au
Tue Jun 21 04:05:18 EDT 2011

Agreed. I have looked at WITSML and PRODML, the issue both of these 'standards' face is that every single element is optional, including the unique ID.

It may be a useful exercise to look at how things are modelled though as you say.

Dale Percival | Division Architect

Information Development and Analysis Services
Tel x9265 | Mobile 0448 674 582

-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Sen, Marcus A.
Sent: Tuesday, 21 June 2011 5:39 PM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [auscope-geosciml] GeoSciML3 Borehole Collar [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-
> geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of
> Dale.Percival at ga.gov.au
> Sent: 21 June 2011 00:41

> Exposing my lack of practical knowledge in boreholes... :-)
I don't have much practical knowledge of boreholes either but I remember that at an early stage of GeoSciML we looked at WITSML (http://www.energistics.org/witsml-standard) but decided it dealt with a lot of complex details outside our real requirements. If we are going to have more complex borehole modelling of details like collar locations, maybe someone familiar with the issues should take another look at WITSML to see how it does things?


This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au

More information about the GeoSciML mailing list