[georss] bbox for Dublin Core?

[Carl Reed OGC Account]

Stefan -

Some additional information from the editor of an OGC document titled OWS-Common (05-008):

In case you do not know, OWS Common [OGC 05-008] contains best practices guidance, in the form of the BoundingBox constructs specified in Subclause 10.2.  Two constructs are specified, a general BoundingBox and a specific WGS84BoundingBox, with both XML and KVP encodings of each.  The reasoning behind Subclause 10.2 is presented in Subclauses C.12 and C.13.


Please notice that a gml:Envelope is NOT the same as this BoundingBox, and is NOT guaranteed to surround the set of data from which it is computed!

The document can be found on the OGC web site and is publicly available.

Regards

Carl

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stefan F. Keller 
  To: Simon.Cox at csiro.au 
  Cc: p.johnston at ukoln.ac.uk ; georss at lists.eogeo.org 
  Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 10:42 AM
  Subject: Re: [georss] bbox for Dublin Core?


  Simon,



  2006/7/31, Simon.Cox at csiro.au < Simon.Cox at csiro.au>:

  > I developed the dcmi:Box and dcmi:Point encodings ... 

  > (a) in response to questions begged by the existence of the 

  >     dc:coverage element 

  > (b) in the context of helping to establish a "lightweight" 

  >     extensibility mechanism for Dublin Core. 

  >  

  > At the time I was not very familiar with the ISO 19100 series, 

  > so missed an opportunity to harmonize terminology. 

  > Note that 

  > 

  > (i) "projection" should be used for Coordinate Reference System 

  > information (per ISO 19111). 

  > The OGC urn scheme provides more robust identifiers than the 

  > EPSG:4326 syntax.  Also note that general CRS schemes are not 

  > restricted to north/south/east/west. 

  > 

  > (ii) In the original versions (e.g. http://dublincore.org/documents/2000/07/28/dcmi-box>) 

  > the dcmi encodings "projection" was optional with a default of 

  > "geographic, height relative to mean-sea-level". This information 

  > was hidden away in the DTD fragment. I didn't know how to write 

  > specs then. This probably also explains why the information got 

  > lost in the recent revision http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-box/index.shtml. 

  > Pete - it might be worth making sure this gets added back in. 

  > 

  > (iii) gml:Envelope implements GM_Envelope from ISO 19107. 

  > Note that, even though it is implemented in terms of the 

  > lower and upper corners, strictly GM_Envelope is *not* a 

  > "rectangle", but rather is a range of coordinate values - i.e . 

  > it is not a geometric figure. Probably not important here. 

  > It is obvious how to transform dcmi:Box information to a 

  > gml:Envelope. 

  >  

  > Simon



  Many thanks for your answer (I'm posting it here because it seems not showing up in this list). 



  I have to think over how to proceed but I really would like to  have a valid and commonly accepted encoding for bbox within Dublin Core which ideally would be 'harmonized' with GeorSS (Simple).



  I also still wonder how geodata.gov handled this issue when it uses OAI-PMH which has Dublin Core as its default information model. 



  -- Stefan



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  georss mailing list
  georss at lists.eogeo.org
  http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.eogeo.org/pipermail/georss/attachments/20060802/f5c79c7d/attachment.html