• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Change Requests | OGC

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2017

Membagikan "Change Requests | OGC"

Copied!
2
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

Open Geospatial Consortium

OGC Doc 08-110

CR-Form-v3

CHANGE REQUEST

GML CR ?

 rev

-

 Current version: 3.2.1 

For

HELP

 

on using this form, see bottom of this page or look at the pop-up text over the symbols.

Proposed change affects:  AS Imp Spec X Best Practices Paper Other

Title:  Clarify semantics of gml:identifier and gml:name vs gml:id

Source:  CSIRO

Work item code:Date:  2008-07-31

Category:D

Use one of the following categories:

F (Critical correction)

A (corresponds to a correction in an earlier release)

B (Addition of feature),

C (Functional modification of feature)

D (Editorial modification)

Detailed explanations of the above categories can be found in the TC Policies and Procedures.

Reason for change:  Three standard elements or attributes are available to hold object identifiers in GML applications: @gml:id, gml:name and gml:identifier. There is need for additional clarification regarding their usage.

Summary of change:1. In clause 7.2.4.4 explain how gml:name and gml:identifier should be used to

record an identifier that is a URI. Add the following paragraph:

If the name or identifier is a URI the codeSpace attribute should indicate the URI scheme. For example, if the identifier is a URN, the codeSpace shall be

urn:ietf:rfc:2141; if the identifier is a URL the codeSpace shall be urn:ietf:rfc:1738 EXAMPLE <gml:identifier

codeSpace="urn:ietf:rfc:2141">urn:cgi:feature:CGI:EarthNaturalSurface</gml:iden tifier>.

2. In clause 7.2.4.5 add an informative note:

NOTE the value of gml:id is locally scoped, and will often be set by the data management system. Identifiers assigned for persistent external use should normally be recorded in the gml:identifier or a gml:name element (clause 7.2.4.4)

Consequences if

not approved: Inconsistent use of gml:id, gml:identifier and gml:name within GML applications.

Clauses affected:  8.1, 7.2.3.8,

Other specs  Other core specifications 

(2)

The OGC Technical Committee Policies & Procedures 05-020r3

Supporting Doc.

Other comments:

Status  Disposition 

How to create CRs using this form: Comprehensive

information and tips about how to create CRs can be found at:

https://portal.open geospatial.org/files /?

artifact_id=10678. Below is a brief summary:

Fill out the above form. The symbols above marked 

contain pop-up help information about the field that they are closest to.

Obtain the latest version for the release of the specification to which the change is proposed. Use the MS Word "revision marks" feature (also known as "track changes") when making the changes. All Open GIS specifications can be downloaded from the OGC server under

http://www.opengeospa tial.org/specs/

If a Word version of the document is not available, please contact the TCC or his designee.

With "track changes" disabled, paste the entire CR form (use CTRL-A to select it) into the specification just in front of the clause containing the first piece of changed text. Delete those parts of the specification that are not relevant to the change request.

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

* The code list encoding in CityGML provides no mechanism to point to the dictionary with the used code list values (and it does not use the GML mechanism) → noone can interpret

not approved: Lack of interoperability, lack of harmonised approaches to encoding range semantics information within coverages, inadequate implementation in GML of ISO 19123

Currently, GML and 19107 have Triangle as a subtype of Polygon, constrained to four points but inheriting the possibility of one or more interior boundaries. With striping, this is

(Association from image sensor that uses this group of sensor parameter values) Public attributes: Two attributes inherited from GF_FeatureType, No attributes inherited

This will indicate that a WFS must generate a GML document of the result set that conforms to the OpenGIS  Geography Markup Language Implementation Specification, version 3.1.1

Remove the “DataInputs” parameter and accept all data input identifiers found in each ProcessDescription document as valid separate input parameters. Introduce the

Reason for change:  The WPS 1.0.0 specification does not provide any mechanism for querying the status of an asynchronous process, though the specification does require an

Add ANNEX E &#34;GML 3.2 XML Schemas for SWE Common (Normative)&#34; containing the schema documents in the accompanying zip document.. Proposed