[WFS FES] A Semantic Maturity Model for Web Feature Services

All Fields marked with

*

are mandatory.

Name:

*

Stephen Desmond

Organization:

_*

_{Land Information New Zealand}

Email:

*

sdesmond@linz.govt.nz

Document

Name/Version:

*

Web Feature Service 2.0 Interface Standard (also ISO 19142) / 2.0

OGC Project

Document:

*

09-025r1

If this is a revision of a previous submission and you have a Change Request Number, then check here:

Enter the CR number here:

Enter the Revsion Number that you are revising here:

Title:

_*

_{[WFS/FES } A Semantic Maturity Model for Web Feature Services}

Source:

*

Land Information New Zealand

Work item code:

Category:

_*

_{B (Addition of feature)}

Reason for

change:

*

This is a useful insight that deserves wider circulation.

Summary of

change:

*

WFS developers have a choice between four approaches to choosing or

> developing a GML schema. There are cost and benefit trade-offs for each one. > 1. �Entry Level�, using the Simple Features Profile.

> 2. Using a locally developed one-off schema and middleware. > 3. Using a Community, but localised one-off schema.

> 4. Using a Standardized schema such as CityGML

Consequences if

not approved:

Clauses affected:

*

This could be a new Annexe in the next version of the WFS Spec, or a free standing document, "Best Practices Guide"

Additional

Documents

affected:

Supporting

Documentation:

Comments:

Status:

Assigned

Assigned To:

_{WFS/FES SWG}