Difference between revisions of "Cat-Interop"
(Created page with "''Workinggroup on Catalogue Interoperability'' * Home Page: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/cat-interop * Mailing List: http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cat-interop ...") |
Tomkralidis (talk | contribs) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '' | + | ''Catalogue Interoperability Working Group'' |
* Home Page: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/cat-interop | * Home Page: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/cat-interop | ||
| + | * GitHub: https://github.com/OSGeo/Cat-Interop | ||
* Mailing List: http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cat-interop | * Mailing List: http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cat-interop | ||
== Description == | == Description == | ||
| − | The group aims to discuss (and test/implement) | + | The group aims to discuss (and test/implement) better interoperability between open source metadata servers and |
| − | clients. Mostly | + | clients. Mostly targeting the use case, find a dataset -> view a dataset. But any other issue in catalogue interoperability can be suggested. |
| − | dataset. But any other issue in catalogue interoperability can be suggested. | + | |
| + | Join the discussion at the mailinglist! | ||
There is still quite some mis-matching in the | There is still quite some mis-matching in the | ||
| − | products out there due to different implementations. Clients as Geonode, | + | products out there due to different implementations. Clients such as Geonode, |
Qgis are not able to display an "add to map" button from some catalogue servers. | Qgis are not able to display an "add to map" button from some catalogue servers. | ||
But even if the button is presented, still some | But even if the button is presented, still some | ||
| − | + | optimizations could be agreed upon. One of the goals would be to have a | |
seamless user experience (find->display) and prevent for example the | seamless user experience (find->display) and prevent for example the | ||
situation where in the CSW client a user should specify the type of | situation where in the CSW client a user should specify the type of | ||
| Line 26: | Line 28: | ||
First initiatives are here [[DCLite4G]]. | First initiatives are here [[DCLite4G]]. | ||
| − | The mailinglist was formed at FOSS4G 2013 in Nottingham as a result of a Birds of Feather on Catalogue interoperability. The BOF was visited by | + | The mailinglist was formed at FOSS4G 2013 in Nottingham as a result of a Birds of Feather on Catalogue interoperability. The BOF was visited by participants from [http://geonetwork-opensource.org GeoNetwork OpenSource], [http://pycsw.org pycsw], [http://ckan.org CKAN], [http://geonode.org GeoNode], [http://qgis.org QGIS], [[OpenLayers]], [http://geoext.org GeoExt]. |
[[Category:OSGeo Workinggroup]] | [[Category:OSGeo Workinggroup]] | ||
| + | [[Category:pycsw]] | ||
Latest revision as of 18:00, 5 March 2014
Catalogue Interoperability Working Group
- Home Page: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/cat-interop
- GitHub: https://github.com/OSGeo/Cat-Interop
- Mailing List: http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cat-interop
Description
The group aims to discuss (and test/implement) better interoperability between open source metadata servers and clients. Mostly targeting the use case, find a dataset -> view a dataset. But any other issue in catalogue interoperability can be suggested.
Join the discussion at the mailinglist!
There is still quite some mis-matching in the products out there due to different implementations. Clients such as Geonode, Qgis are not able to display an "add to map" button from some catalogue servers. But even if the button is presented, still some optimizations could be agreed upon. One of the goals would be to have a seamless user experience (find->display) and prevent for example the situation where in the CSW client a user should specify the type of metadata catalogue (s)he wants to add data from.
Approach
- End of 2013 we hope to agree on a specification to implement an interoperable DC-profile, work in progress is here [1]
- Start of 2014 we hope projects will be able to set up forks with this implementation and we want to set up a test procedure (set of test records on osgeo-live-dvd)
- At FOSS4G 2014 we might organise a benchmark on interoperability
History
First initiatives are here DCLite4G.
The mailinglist was formed at FOSS4G 2013 in Nottingham as a result of a Birds of Feather on Catalogue interoperability. The BOF was visited by participants from GeoNetwork OpenSource, pycsw, CKAN, GeoNode, QGIS, OpenLayers, GeoExt.