Well,

Another way to do it is through a GML Profile:

...

...

From Wikipedia:

"GML profiles are XML schemas that extend Geography Markup Language (GML) in a modular fashion. A commonly used GML profile, geometryBasic0D1D.xsd is the only one required by many applications. These profiles are intended to simplify adoption of GML, to facilitate rapid adoption of the standard. The following profiles, as defined by the GML specification, have been published or proposed for public use: A Point Profile for applications with point geometric data but without the need for the full GML grammar A GML Simple Features profile supporting vector feature requests and transactions, e.g. with a WFS A GML profile for GMJP2 (GML in JPEG 2000) A GML profile for RSS Note that Profiles are distinct from application schemas. Profiles are part of GML namespaces (Open GIS GML) and define restricted subsets of GML. Application schemas are XML vocabularies defined using GML and which live in an application-defined target namespace. Application schemas can be built on specific GML profiles or use the full GML schema set."

That will generate schemas like: -------- <PhotoCollection xmlns="http://www.myphotos.org" xmlns:gml="http://www.opengis.net/gml" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.myphotos.org MyGoodPhotos.xsd"> <items> <Item> <name>Lynn Valley</name> <description>A shot of the falls from the suspension bridge</description> <where>North Vancouver</where> <position> <gml:Point srsDimension="2" srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG:6.6:4326"> gml:pos49.40 -123.26</gml:pos> </gml:Point> </position> </Item> </items> </PhotoCollection> ---------

But application schemas still looks a little bit better to be able to use all available software existing for GML.

We are working right now in an example GML application schema binding ABCD and Darwin Core using the geospatial extension. Right now in the emails is only Flip, Jens Fitzke (from lat/lon) and John Wieczorek. But I hope we can come with a WFS service serving them by the end of the week.

Is it my impressions or seems that the TDWG architecture discussion is moving to RDF?

Javier.

On 1/17/06, Roger Hyam roger@tdwg.org wrote:

I just came across a couple of pages pertinent to the recent discussion regarding GML.

http://danbri.org/words/2005/07/26/110

http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/

Among the general noise made by people in St Petersburg were the comments that GML as a whole was "too complex". Perhaps profiling a subset in RDF (especially under the umbrella of W3C) would solve several problems.

Anyhow worth thinking about if we want to freely mix geographic data with our biodiversity data.

What do you think?

Roger

--

---

Roger Hyam Technical Architect Taxonomic Databases Working Group

---

http://www.tdwg.org roger@tdwg.org

+44 1578 722782

---

Tdwg-tag mailing list Tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag_lists.tdwg.org