inspire reports may 2010 quality knowledge exchange network

INSPIRE Reports May 2010

Quality Knowledge Exchange Network

INSPIRE reports –why?

• Knowledge exchange

• Reports might lead to further actions for Q-KEN

• Group work

• Deeper knowledge exchange

• Comments or other input to COM, JRC and others

• Presentations

• To learn more

Report from Q-KEN member

No report this time

Corresponding Q-KEN member

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• The committee agreed on the specifications for annex I in December, do

the specification fulfil the needs concerning quality?

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• We are now facing the phase of sharing data and implementing the

infrastructure. Is this easily achieved? If not, what are the major

challenges?

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to• At some of our plenary meetings we have had external INSPIRE

presentations. What presentation would you like to hear in a coming

plenary meeting?

INSTRUCTIONSOrganisation/CountryPeriod Covered

Quality requirements missing in the specification?

GermanyThe question suggests that it is possible to introduce new requirements but the aim of INSPIRE is to use existing data sets,

GreeceNo clear understanding of the selection criteria for the feature types and corresponding quality measurements

HungaryImplementation of the data security (authentication and encryption)

Spain (IGN)Yes, but there is a lack of actual experience evaluating data quality elements

DenmarkInconsistent requirementsPossibly create common set for all specifications

Czech Republic Simplified data information about positional accuracy of pointsMore mandatory quality elements similar to DQM

Spain - ICCMost of the elements proposed are optional - Why?

Great BritainIt’s not that they are missing but that they are optional, and there’s no requirement (yet) to create data if you don’t have it

MaltaCompleteness, Positional Accuracy, Temporal Accuracy and Thematic Accuracy are optional elements and not for all Themes

PolandQuality evaluation procedures

Sweden Quality evaluation procedures

Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE (1/2)

HungaryNo state budget for the INSPIRE implementationHarmonisation of the INSPIRE regulation with the more strict national regulations

IrelandTechnical challenges absorbs costs!Gap between current datasets and mandatory requirements Identifying datasets and authorative dataset owner

NorwayAchieve enthusiasm for Inspire in to ensure to get the dataData to be distributed from centralised data base at first, technology and capacityOrganisation and financing

PolandData transformation and updateHarmonisation of services between MS

Spain (IGN)Harmonisation of data ,national and among Europe, EuroRegionalMap is a good example

DenmarkMain challenge is to organise the implementation and the involvements of data owners/providersDevil is in the detail…

GreeceData sharing

SwedenData sharing (concerning security, integrity and confidentiality).

Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE (2/2)

AustriaSemi-automated actualisation and maintenance of metadata GRM until August 2011

Czech RepublicAdjustment of boundariesEdge-matchingGeographical names data model

Spain (ICC)Provision of conformant datasetsSemantic differences between descriptionsConformant network service architecture in MS

GermanyWe have long experience with EuroGeographics products, we transform national datasets according to the commonly agreed EuroGeographics specs. What’s the difference to transforming data to the INSPIRE specs?

Within the EuroGeographics products we are doing more than INSPIRE requires: we are harmonising datasets and offering the data at unified licensing and pricing conditions.

To me the position and strategy of EuroGeographics with regard to its own products and the INSPIRE process seams unclear

Great BritainLack of leadership within the UK

MaltaLack of real understanding of what needs to be doneProper infrastructure for implementing INSPIRE not yet in place

What presentation would you like to hear in a coming plenary meeting?

Czech RepublicHow to coordinate responsibility for data sets maintenance on national level?Use of data and services license agreements

GreeceAdvances in the INSPIRE transformation modelNMCAs: State-of-art in data harmonisation

HungaryA presentation from Frieda Brepoels (EPP-ED) Member of the European Parliament and Rapporteur the INSPIRE Directive (The topic: results and an outlook)

IrelandQuality Evaluation Web Services

NorwayUse of Inspire-dataCadastre parcels

PolandINSPIRE data harmonisation model in different MSHow to measure quality of INSPIRE services?

Spain (ICC)INSPIRE Network Services – Types, requirements, architecture Process of development of Annex II and III DS (now starting)

Spain (IGN)How is an Inspire European Services Catalogue/Registry going to be implemented

DenmarkHow will the spatial data infrastructure look like in year 2020? Visions and scenarios..

MaltaINSPIRE discovery services – implementation and end-user reaction

Sweden Who is doing what and how are different actors linked (COM, JRC, GMES, ESDIN, etc)

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Establishment of an institutional Metadata-Database and MD-Editor for a semi-

automated actualisation and maintenance of the metadata for INSPIRE in 2010.

• Development and Implementation of a Digital Rights Management-Layer

(Authentication, Authorization, fees…) until August 2011.

BEV, AustriaFrom November 2009 to May 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Simplified data information about positional accuracy of points

• More mandatory quality elements similar to DQM

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Adjustment of boundaries in large scales

• Edge-matching of data sets

• Improvement of common geographical names data model

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen

to• How to coordinate responsibility for data sets maintenance on

national level?

• Use of data and services license agreements

COSMC, Czech RepublicFrom December 2009 to April 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification

The question suggests that it is possible to introduce new requirements but the

aim of INSPIRE is to use existing data sets, see

DIRECTIVE 2007/2/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 14 March 2007

establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE)

“(13) This Directive should not set requirements for the collection of new data, or for reporting such information

to the Commission, since those matters are regulated by other legislation related to the environment”

This means the specification has to consider the different levels of data

quality within the member states. It has to be a compromise between

what the countries can deliver to get a complete coverage of Europe

and what is nice to have.

BKG, GermanyApril 2010

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE

Since the late 90’s we have experience with EuroGeographics products

(SABE=EBM, ERM, EGM), i.e. we transform national datasets

according to the commonly agreed EuroGeographics specs. What’s the

difference to transforming data to the INSPIRE specs?

Within the EuroGeographics products we are doing more than INSPIRE

requires: we are harmonizing datasets, cross border match them and

offering the data at unified licensing and pricing conditions.

To me the position and strategy of EuroGeographics with regard to its

own products and the INSPIRE process seams unclear.

BKG, GermanyApril 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• As it was also pointed out from the Q-KEN benchmark exercise concerning

Quality evaluation of the ESDIN Quality model for the INSPIRE ANNEX I

themes of GN, AU, CP, TN and HY, the INSPIRE Specifications do not provide

clear understanding of the selection criteria for the feature types and

corresponding quality measurements (this will be provided in the ESDIN ExM

specifications).

• However, potential problems occur also in the definition of the domains and

the universes of discourse of the quality elements / sub-elements that will be

measured for each Feature Type (FT) / Feature Attribute / (association).

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to

• Advances in the INSPIRE transformation model

• NMCAs: State-of-art in data harmonisation

KTIMATOLOGIO S.A (Hellenic Cadastre) GREECE

From November 2009 to April 2010


At the data sharing phase, the major challenges could be regarding:

• Licensing of data and services produced by self-funding and / or European co-funded

projects.

• Minimum quality requirements of shared data products among different NMCAs of the

same MS.

• Further, more detailed clarification / explanation of the term “harmonised conditions of

access to spatial data sets and services.

• Data sharing among public authorities within the country , according to Article 17 of the

Directive, has not been arranged or resolved yet. As a general remark, there is a lack of

cooperation for planning and implementation of similar data collection and processing

projects as well as lack of data sharing agreements among public authorities. Regulating

this situation according to INSPIRE Directive would be a major step towards data sharing

with European authorities as well.

• Major restrictions for data sharing are: intellectual property rights, protection of privacy,

public security, national defence, confidentiality of statistical information, competition ,

needed official approvals, unspecified digital data policy.

KTIMATOLOGIO S.A (Hellenic Cadastre) GREECE

From November 2009 to April 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Implementation of the data security (authentication and encryption)

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Not any Hungarian state budget for the INSPIRE implementation

• Harmonisation of the Regulation of the Data and Service Sharing (EU 268/2010) with

the more strict Hungarian Regulations

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen

to• A presentation from Frieda Brepoels (EPP-ED) Member of the European Parliament

and Rapporteur the INSPIRE Directive (The topic: results and an outlook)

FÖMI, HungaryFrom November 2009 to April 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Nothing to report

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Meeting technical challenges absorbs costs!

• Identifying and addressing the gap between current datasets and mandatory requirements

• Identifying datasets and authorative dataset owner e.g. road network in Ireland

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to• Quality Evaluation Web Services

Ordnance Survey Ireland, Ireland From Jan 2010 to May 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Achieve enthusiasm for Inspire in different special fields to

ensure to get the data

• Data to be distributed from centralized data base at first. Technology and capacity

• The national implementations must build on existing cooperation such as the Norway digital cooperation

• Organisation and financing

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to• Use of Inspire-data

• Cadastre parcels

Norwegian Mapping AuthorityNorwayFrom November 2009 to April 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Quality evaluation procedures

•

•

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• INSPIRE data transformation and update

• Harmonisation of INSPIRE services between MS to achieve interoperability

•

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to• INSPIRE data harmonisation model in different MS

• How to measure quality of INSPIRE services?

Head Office of Geodesy and Cartography, PolandFrom December 2009 to May 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Although list of quality requirements in INSPIRE DS is considered quite

comprehensive, most of the elements proposed are optional.

• Why? - Situation in Europe is mostly below whole INSPIRE DS DQ expectations

• ESDIN QM is perceived as a nice opportunity to specify which quality measures

should be applied and to fix concrete requirements for each range of scales.

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Provision of 100% conformant datasets. Is really INSPIRE conformance something which

should be Boolean or maybe X%?

• Best practices to address semantic differences between descriptions in both source and

INSPIRE target models (feature types, attributes, relationships)

• Provision of a conformant network service architecture in Member States

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to• INSPIRE Network Services – Types, requirements, architecture

• Process of development of Annex II and III DS (now starting)

ICC, Catalonia - SpainFrom December 2009 to April 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Yes, but there is a lack of actual experience evaluating data quality elements.

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Harmonization of data among Mapping Agencies of Spain

• Harmonization among Europe: EuroRegionalMap is a good example

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to

listen to• How is an Inspire European Services Catalogue/Registry going to be

implemented

IGN, SpainFrom December 2009 to May 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• Quality evaluation procedures.


• Data sharing (concerning security, integrity and confidentiality).

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to

listen to• Who is doing what and how are different actors linked (COM, JRC,

GMES, ESDIN, etc).

Lantmäteriet, SwedenFrom December 2009 to May 2010

• Quality requirements missing in the specification• One problem is inconsistent requirements

• No common set of quality elements among all specifications

• Possibly create common set for all specifications • Some specifications would have to be “extended” but could be done by profiles

• Major challenges for implementing INSPIRE• Main challenge is to organise the implementation and the involvements of data

owners/providers

• Devil is in the detail… • A lot of technicalities are not clear at the moment and even inconsistent (especially among the

various regulations and guidelines)

• Some problems arise only when the technical implementation start

• An INSPIRE (external) presentation I would like to listen to• How will the spatial data infrastructure look like in year 2020?

• Visions and scenarios..

KMS, DenmarkApril 2010

inspire reports may 2010 quality knowledge exchange network

Documents