| 19 | | - fileIdentifier : the table says it is not mapped, but "see Table F.1". Does this mean the information (already put in a MetadataInformation in table F.1) must be repeated in this ResourceMetadata ? In this case I opted for YES. |
| 20 | | - h |
| | 19 | - fileIdentifier : the table says it is not mapped, but "see Table F.1". Does this mean the information (already put in a !MetadataInformation in table F.1) must be repeated in this !ResourceMetadata ? In this case I opted for YES. |
| | 20 | - language : the table says it is not mapped, but "see Table F.1". Does this mean the information (already put in a !MetadataInformation in table F.1) must be repeated in this !ResourceMetadata ? In this case I opted for YES. |
| | 21 | - parentIdentifier : the table says it is not mapped, but "see Table F.1". Does this mean the information (already processed into an extra !MetadataInformation in table F.1) must be repeated ? In this case I opted for NO, as there already is a parent !MetadataInformation as per table F.1. |
| | 23 | |
| | 24 | Table F.15 |
| | 25 | |
| | 26 | - "The existence of an instance of MD_Metadata.referenceSystemInfo will possibly imply to create an instance of !CitedItem along with an instance of the association Auhority between !IdentifiedItem and !CitedItem." |
| | 27 | |
| | 28 | *possibly* ? what is that supposed to mean ? I'm assuming : if there is an authority element in referenceSystemInfo. |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | - alternateTitle : this has cardinality 0..n, but this spec doesn't mention it. I'm assuming they mean to say "for each". |
| | 31 | - date : must be mapped to <<slot>> created, <<slot>> modified or <<slot>> issued. The spec does not say *how* this must be mapped. I'm using 'creation', 'revision' and 'publication' from the codelists used in ISO. |
| | 32 | - date : this has cardinality 1..n, but this spec doesn't mention it. I'm assuming they mean to say "for each". |
| | 33 | - identifier.MD_Identifier.code : "Identifiers with no codespace do not carry sufficient information and are not mapped to externalIdentifier, for which the codespace is required." BUT MD_Identifier *never* has a codespace, per the XSD. Only its substitutiongroup RS_Identifier may have a codespace. I'm assuming they intended to say, RS_Identifier. |
| | 34 | |
| | 35 | Table F.16 |
| | 36 | |
| | 37 | - everytime, an Organization is created. So in this way these Organizations are never re-used / shared between data referring to them. Does not seem to make much sense, to me. |
| | 38 | - individualName : is ignored, but not "If needed". Well .. I'm ignoring it. |
| | 39 | - organizationName : this must be organisationName (with 's') in ISO. |
| | 40 | - organizationName : this is not a required element in ISO. What if it is absent ? The created Organization will be rather non-descript. |
| | 41 | - about the !CitedResponsibleParty Association : "The association Type has a set of subtypes operating to the same object types: PointOfCOntact, Author, Originator, Publisher." This is not true, no such subtypes are defined. From clues elsewhere in that document I take it this stuff is handled by classifying the association. |
| | 42 | - the codelist values for gmd:role can be many other things than just 'pointOfCOntact', 'author', 'originator', or 'publisher'. If it is not one of those 4, I ignore it so no classification will be created. Does it make sense to you? |
| | 43 | |
| | 44 | TO BE CONTINUED |
| | 45 | |
