[auscope-geosciml] Testbed 4: Schematron rules, instance documents and model review

Tellez-Arenas Agnes a.tellez-arenas at brgm.fr
Thu May 5 05:31:00 EDT 2011


For a WFS yes

But it that case we would not be able to use a filter included in a SLD to visualize only some features using a "GeoSciMLV3" SLD.

Agnès

-----Message d'origine-----
De : auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] De la part de Boisvert, Eric
Envoyé : mercredi 4 mai 2011 18:59
À : auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] Testbed 4: Schematron rules,instance documents and model review


Maybe is one of the things that WFS 2.0 stored query is supposed to solve.
Although the model does not have a "preferredAge", this property can be exposed in a WFS view (stored queries, section 14 of ISO-19142 / OGC 09-025r1), pushing the logic of deciding how the actual selection is being done to the server.
 
My 2 cents
Eric

-----Message d'origine-----
De : auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] De la part de Laxton, John L.
Envoyé : 4 mai 2011 12:38
À : auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] Testbed 4: Schematron rules, instance documents and model review

The problem regarding the age of rocks is just the one I highlighted about a year ago when we were discussing the need for preferredAge. Without preferredAge we can't query for rocks of Jurassic age, only rocks that were deposited in the Jurassic, or intruded in the Jurassic etc. We have to say that, for example, for sedimentary rocks the 'most significant' age is the age of deposition and search for an event of that type of the age we are interested in. Different rock types will have different 'most significant' events.

As I've said before I think this is a major problem with this incarnation of the model.......

John

-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Tellez-Arenas Agnes
Sent: 04 May 2011 16:54
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [auscope-geosciml] Testbed 4: Schematron rules, instance documents and model review

Yes it can be a specific profile, for a future 1G option.

Regarding the filter on lithology, we could decide that such filter is "search sand in any lithology" rather than "search sand as the main lithology", if "main" doesn't have an obvious meaning.

Regarding the age, I don't know how to do if we have several geologicHistory. I guess that "search a GeologicUnit which one GeologicEvent of its GeologicHistory has olderNamedAge=quaternary" is meaningless, isn't it?

Agnès

-----Message d'origine-----
De : auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] De la part de Sen, Marcus A.
Envoyé : mardi 3 mai 2011 17:17
À : auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] Testbed 4: Schematron rules, instance documents and model review

> -----Original Message-----
> From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope- 
> geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Tellez-Arenas Agnes
> Sent: 02 May 2011 09:20

> Rules with some comments about the rules that would be required to 
> apply filter on age and lithology.
Would it be appropriate to define these rules as belonging to a specific profile?

I.e. the general model is flexible and allows the association of a number of different ages and lithologies with a geologic unit but we would like to provide some services which allow applications to highlight or colour mapped features according to a single nominal age or lithology. So we could define restricted profiles for the use of simple querying clients that only had a single age or lithology.

>     * In order to be able to request the "main" lithology, we must 
> define one lithology per compositionPart, and use the proportion of 
> the composition part to determine the main one
Do we also need to ensure only one composition property per geologic unit?

>     * But, as the proportion is now defined using numbers, it will be 
> difficult (or even impossible) to extract the "main". We can only use 
> cgu:estimatedValue, swe:value (considering that uom is always %), to 
> propose filter searching for lithology "more than 50%" (for instance).
> But if we have several lithology (20%, 20%, 20M, 40%), the main one 
> won't match this filter.
I'm a bit confused over when you might have more than one composition property on a GeologicUnit and whether there is any implied dominance between several lithology properties of a RockMaterial. The proportion property of the CompositionPart refers to proportion of a particular CompoundMaterial/RockMaterial that might have several lithologies itself. So we could say we want just one GeologicUnit/composition property and that the RockMaterial should have just one lithology property. Or if we allowed several GeologicUnit/composition properties then require one with a proportion of > 50% / 75% or something. What seems the best idea to everyone?

> Age
> 
>     * Without preferred age (if we have several GeologicEvent in the 
> GeologicHistory), how to determine what age should be requested?
>     * If we are able to know what geologicEvent should be request,
>           o we could use <gsml:olderNamedAge 
> xlink:href="urn:cgi:classifier:ICS:StratChart:200908:UpperOrdovician"/
> >, so it is required to give an olderNamedAge using the controlled
> vocabulary.
So shall we make a profile which requires just one GeologicUnit/geologicHistory property where the olderNamedAge = youngerNamedAge? Any comments?

Marcus


--
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
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
**********************************************************************************************
Pensez a l'environnement avant d'imprimer ce message Think Environment before printing
 
Le contenu de ce mel et de ses pieces jointes est destine a l'usage exclusif du (des) destinataire(s) designe
(s) comme tel(s). 
En cas de reception par erreur, le signaler a son expediteur et ne pas en divulguer le contenu. 
L'absence de virus a ete verifiee a l'emission, il convient neanmoins de s'assurer de l'absence de contamination a sa reception.
 
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for the named recipient
(s) only. 
If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies. 
eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content.
**********************************************************************************************

_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
**********************************************************************************************
Pensez a l'environnement avant d'imprimer ce message
Think Environment before printing
 
Le contenu de ce mel et de ses pieces jointes est destine a l'usage exclusif du (des) destinataire(s) designe
(s) comme tel(s). 
En cas de reception par erreur, le signaler a son expediteur et ne pas en divulguer le contenu. 
L'absence de virus a ete verifiee a l'emission, il convient neanmoins de s'assurer de l'absence de 
contamination a sa reception.
 
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for the named recipient
(s) only. 
If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do 
not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies. 
eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content.
**********************************************************************************************




More information about the GeoSciML mailing list