[auscope-geosciml] FW: OneGeology Schematron rules

Bruce.Simons at csiro.au Bruce.Simons at csiro.au
Wed May 23 19:04:18 EDT 2012

Following discussions between Simon, Alistair, myself and Jonathon Yu, I suggest that for Tagged Values asDictionary = 'true', the schema URI (e.g. http://resource.geosciml.org/classifier/cgi/geologicunittype) be included in the dictionaryIdentifier tagged value.

This would allow a generic Schematron rule along the lines 'where asDictionary='true', xlink:href value must be a member of dictionaryIdentifier scheme'. The content check could be resolved using SPARQL on a vocabulary service.

This has the upside of not needing to investigate the Schematron rules to find out which dictionary is being used (its specified in the UML).
The downside is that the dictionaries are bound to the UML. It could be considered a CGI Profile of GeoSciML and a change of vocabulary is a change in Profile.

Bruce Simons
SDI Information Modeller
Land and Water/ Environmental Information Systems
E bruce.simons at csiro.au T +61 3 9252 6514 M +61 429 177155
PO Box 56, Highett, Victoria, 3190
www.csiro.au | www.csiro.au/science/Environmental-Information-Systems

The information contained in this email may be confidential or privileged. Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately and notify the sender by return email. Thank you. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Steve Richard
Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2012 3:19 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] FW: OneGeology Schematron rules

Can we update the schematron rules to use the 201202 versions of the vocabularies, and put them in the 3.0.0 tag?  Has anybody tested them?

From: Clemens Portele [mailto:portele at interactive-instruments.de]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 7:38 AM
To: Boisvert, Eric
Cc: steve.richard at azgs.az.gov<mailto:steve.richard at azgs.az.gov>; Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au<mailto:Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au>; jll at bgs.ac.uk<mailto:jll at bgs.ac.uk> Laxton; Serrano Jean-Jacques; Ian Jackson; Geoff Wade; Satish Sankaran; Roberto Lucchi
Subject: Re: OneGeology Schematron rules

Thanks, my understanding was that anything in the 3.0.0 branch would be untested/inofficial and only those in the 3.0.0 tag would be official. Maybe we should confirm with Tim which rules they are using in the clients. Should I do this?

>From the two Schematron files the right one is probably https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/subversion/GeoSciML/branches/3.0.0/schematron/GeoSciML_v3_Testbed_4.sch. Correct?

Does this mean that we have to use the 201012 vocabulary instead of the 201202 one as this includes URIs with numeric codes, e.g. http://resource.geosciml.org/classifier/cgi/geologicunittype/0005?

Is my understanding correct that we will not have any Chronostratigraphic units or Deformation units? Both have assertions that require relatedFeature properties and as far as I can see these are not part of the profile we have defined.


Am 23.05.2012 um 15:50 schrieb Boisvert, Eric:
AFAIK, these (https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/subversion/GeoSciML/branches/3.0.0/schematron/) are the rules written in Edinburgh last summer

I'm not aware of any other schematron files.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20120524/7dde4df5/attachment.htm>

More information about the GeoSciML mailing list