sis-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Desruisseaux (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (SIS-363) Import/export metadata in JSON or YAML format
Date Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:19:00 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SIS-363?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Martin Desruisseaux updated SIS-363:
------------------------------------
    Priority: Major  (was: Minor)

> Import/export metadata in JSON or YAML format
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SIS-363
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SIS-363
>             Project: Spatial Information Systems
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Metadata
>            Reporter: Martin Desruisseaux
>
> The {{sis-metadata}} module could quite easily write metadata in the JSON format. We
only need to iterate over the entries returned by {{AbstractMetadata.asMap()}}, recursively
when the value is itself another metadata.
> However in the case of JSON format, we have two open questions:
>   * What is the best way to handle the case where the same metadata element (typically
a {{Responsibility}}) is used in more than one place? Do we repeat the information, or do
we use some link mechanism? (in XML we can use {{"xlink:href"}}) This question is especially
important when there is cyclic associations (e.g. {{Instrument}} has a reference to its {{Platform}},
which itself has references to the instruments installed on that platform).
> * What is the best way to specify the type of a metadata element when various subtypes
exist? For example a property of type {{GeographicExtent}} can actually contains a {{GeographicBoundingBox}}
or a {{BoundingPolygon}}. Do we try to guess according which attributes appear in the JSON
document, or do we provide a more deterministic mechanism?
> The YAML format (which can been seen as superset of JSON format) has build-in mechanisms
that solve those two questions. But YAML is not as popular as JSON. If we constraint ourself
to JSON, then the YAML functionalities may need to be simulated in some way. There is some
discussion at OGC about JSON-LD where "LD" stands for "Linked Data", but we have not investigated
if it would be applicable to this situation. 
> Another question is whether a standard exists for ISO 19115 representation in JSON.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Mime
View raw message