what are the URIs for codelist values?

[smrgeoinfo]

RE: w3c/dxwg#975 (comment) "Could the stylesheet CodelistDictionary-v32.xsl be modified to show the gml:id values so that the URIs of the individual entries are visible?"

In the gml encoding of code lists:

<dictionaryEntry>
  <Definition gml:id="_12383_18905">
  <description>party that accepts accountability and responsibility for the resource and ensures appropriate care and maintenance of the resource</description>
  <identifier codeSpace="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0">custodian</identifier>
  </Definition>
</dictionaryEntry>

IN the cat encoding:

<cat:codeEntry>
      <cat:CT_CodelistValue id="CI_RoleCode_custodian">
         <cat:identifier>
            <gco:ScopedName codeSpace="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0">custodian</gco:ScopedName>
         </cat:identifier>
               .......
      </cat:CT_CodelistValue>
</cat:codeEntry>

It looks to me like the URI for the codelist concept should be codespace + '/' or '#' + the identifier for scopedName element value, e.g.

http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0/custodian or
http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0#custodian

Has there been a determination by any ISO management group on what these URIs should look like?

see also #115

[ejbleys]

Hi Stephen There is a process to migrate the standards to https://schemas.isotc211.org <https://schemas.isotc211.org/> That should be the official address for codeSpace Cheers Evert Evert Bleys Convenor IST/TC211 XMG Australia +61 (0)2 62811773 +61 (0)411 483 876 ejbleys@gmail.com Skype ejbleijs@gmail.com

…

On 2019-07-20, at 2:31 am, Stephen Richard ***@***.***> wrote: In the gml encoding of code lists: <dictionaryEntry> <Definition gml:id="_12383_18905"> <description>party that accepts accountability and responsibility for the resource and ensures appropriate care and maintenance of the resource</description> <identifier codeSpace="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0">custodian</identifier> </Definition> </dictionaryEntry> IN the cat encoding: <cat:codeEntry> <cat:CT_CodelistValue id="CI_RoleCode_custodian"> <cat:identifier> <gco:ScopedName codeSpace="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0">custodian</gco:ScopedName> </cat:identifier> ....... </cat:CT_CodelistValue> </cat:codeEntry> It looks to me like the URI for the codelist concept should be codespace + '/' or '#' + the identifier for scopedName element value, e.g. http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0/custodian <http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0/custodian> or http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0#custodian <http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0#custodian> Has there been a determination by any ISO management group on what these URIs should look like? see also #115 <#115> — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#205?email_source=notifications&email_token=AIBGJZ3V4SNMIYFSUZRXNKLQAHT5NA5CNFSM4IFH6NAKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4HAKCPSA>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIBGJZ4M6ASOBAVNL47QZPLQAHT5NANCNFSM4IFH6NAA>.

[smrgeoinfo]

would the URI for an individual code value be

https://schemas.isotc211.org/19115/-3/cit/1.0/custodian
or
https://schemas.isotc211.org/19115/-3/cit/1.0#custodian

or something else?

[ejbleys]

Hi Stephen Surely you also need to identify the file and then the section codeSpace="https://schemas.isotc211.org/19115/-3/cit/1.0/codelists.xml#CI_DateTypeCode <https://schemas.isotc211.org/19115/-3/cit/1.0/codelists.xml#CI_DateTypeCode>" The value falls within the space, it does not form the space codeValue="custodian" Cheers Evert Evert Bleys Convenor ISO/TC211 XMG Australia +61 (0)2 62811773 +61 (0)411 483 876 ejbleys@gmail.com Skype ejbleijs@gmail.com

…

On 2019-07-20, at 10:46 am, Evert Bleys ***@***.***> wrote: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Stephen Richard ***@***.*** ***@***.***>> > Date: 20 July 2019 at 02:31:18 AEST > To: ISO-TC211/XML ***@***.*** ***@***.***>> > Cc: Subscribed ***@***.*** ***@***.***>> > Subject: [ISO-TC211/XML] what are the URIs for codelist values? (#205) > Reply-To: ISO-TC211/XML ***@***.*** ***@***.***>> > > In the gml encoding of code lists: > > <dictionaryEntry> > <Definition gml:id="_12383_18905"> > <description>party that accepts accountability and responsibility for the resource and ensures appropriate care and maintenance of the resource</description> > <identifier codeSpace="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0 <http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0>">custodian</identifier> > </Definition> > </dictionaryEntry> > IN the cat encoding: > > <cat:codeEntry> > <cat:CT_CodelistValue id="CI_RoleCode_custodian"> > <cat:identifier> > <gco:ScopedName codeSpace="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0 <http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0>">custodian</gco:ScopedName> > </cat:identifier> > ....... > </cat:CT_CodelistValue> > </cat:codeEntry> > It looks to me like the URI for the codelist concept should be codespace + '/' or '#' + the identifier for scopedName element value, e.g. > > http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0/custodian <http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0/custodian> or > http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0#custodian <http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/-3/cit/1.0#custodian> > Has there been a determination by any ISO management group on what these URIs should look like? > > see also #115 <#115> > — > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#205?email_source=notifications&email_token=AIBGJZ3V4SNMIYFSUZRXNKLQAHT5NA5CNFSM4IFH6NAKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4HAKCPSA>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIBGJZ4M6ASOBAVNL47QZPLQAHT5NANCNFSM4IFH6NAA>. >

[smrgeoinfo]

This still doesn't give a URI for the individual concept.

[ejbleys]

That’s correct The combination of the two XML attributes ‘codeSpace' & ‘codeValue' provides the concept There has been a push towards using something like ‘CI_RoleCode-custodian’ as the value, but that doesn’t achieve what you are after either To allow for the provision of a concept a different XML attribute would be needed eg concept=“” that could logically replace the two mandatory ‘codeSpace' & ‘codeValue' Cheers e Evert Bleys Convenor ISO/TC211 XMG Australia

[dr-shorthair]

A single URI-per-concept is best practice for linked data applications.

We stood these copies up 3 yeas ago now:
http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211
Each individual codelist has a dereferenceable URI such as
http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211/MD_ScopeCode
and then each code has one which is a child of this such as
http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211/MD_ScopeCode/dataset
We only did this because ISO/TC 211 couldn't get its act together to provide it from a canonical URI.

Note that an XML file for the whole codelist, or a HTML rendering of that. does not satisfy the requirement to be able to refer to an individual code in a non-XML context.

[dr-shorthair]

Note that it is not the file that matters here, it is the concept.
Best practice is for it to be available in various serializations - try the [Download] tab in the above links.

[ejbleys]

Hi Simon Agreed that it is the concept that matters in a non-XML context AND in a different XML context. In the XML context referred to in the original question (I agree ISO/TC211 does not seem to have tried to address the issue) the system is not designed to provide a URI for the concept Note: The delivery of information about the concept is independent of its usage (possibly why ISO/TC 211 has not moved more swiftly on inclusion of concept URI in the metadata The delivery of the concept with an associated URI for that concepts eg https://schemas.isotc211.org/19115/-3/cit/1.0/codelists.xml#CI_DateTypeCode_creation <https://schemas.isotc211.org/19115/-3/cit/1.0/codelists.xml#CI_DateTypeCode_creation> That form is already within the code list XML eg as <cat:CT_CodelistValue id=“CI_DateTypeCode_creation"/> I (personally) would prefer the code lists to be in SKOS Cheers Evert Evert Bleys Convenor ISO/TC211 XMG Australia +61 (0)2 62811773 +61 (0)411 483 876 email: ejbleys@gmail.com Skype:EJBleijs@gmail.com

…

On 2019-07-21, at 10:46 am, Simon Cox ***@***.***> wrote: A single URI-per-concept is best practice for linked data applications. We stood these copies up 3 yeas ago now: http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211 <http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211> Each individual codelist has a dereferenceable URI such as http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211/MD_ScopeCode <http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211/MD_ScopeCode> and then each code has one which is a child of this such as http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211/MD_ScopeCode/dataset <http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/isotc211/MD_ScopeCode/dataset> We only did this because ISO/TC 211 couldn't get its act together to provide it from a canonical URI. Note that an XML file for the whole codelist, or a HTML rendering of that does not satisfy the requirement to be able to refer to an individual code in a non-XML context. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#205?email_source=notifications&email_token=AIBGJZ6LPEUDA3CAW2SSZZ3QAOWWJA5CNFSM4IFH6NAKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2NYSNA#issuecomment-513509684>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIBGJZYZJA6EDPXOT2TARALQAOWWJANCNFSM4IFH6NAA>.