Bruce, I have just started doing some prototyping to work this all out. As soon as I have made some headway I will move this discussion to ebxmlrr (I will send you the link). From first investigations having download the zip file from the OGC web site I can just import the ISO 19115/19119 ebxml documents straight in to form my classification schemes.
I may have just seen the light (through the dry spec), but in case I haven't I will document this all on the ebxmlrr wiki for comment. thanks, Norman On 3/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Josh / Norman, If an engine like GeoNetwork is not used, how is it proposed that ISO 19115 / 19119 metadata will be handled? Bruce Today's Topics: 1. Re: Re: ebrim FUD (Joshua Lieberman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 07:18:31 -0500 From: Joshua Lieberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Re: ebrim FUD To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Norman, Haven't finished a response to this (traveling as well). I wanted to say that the "engine" of Geonetworks is quite different from that of ebxmlrr, but we have discussed whether something like ebxmlrr could be used as the Geonetwork persistence mechanism. I don't think a conclusion has been reached yet, but interest continues. Cheers, Josh On Mar 9, 2007, at 4:57 AM, Norman Barker wrote: > Hi, > > After I have published an invitation to an IRC chat late next week > (I am flying to Boulder for work tomorrow), I will move this thread > to the ebxmlrr forum. I thought this would stimulate more debate, > but the responses I have had back so far have been of a high > quality. Peter Vretanos from CubeWerx has provided a lot of sample > queries from his work, and a study on how to map capabilities > documents which will make a good start. There is also a lot of > interest from ebxmlrr. > > I will publish an agenda, and a straw man approach next week to > this list, and then we will move off. > > Though I like other catalog efforts, and welcome the opportunity to > move any project under their umbrella, I think perhaps ebxmlrr is a > major architecture change as opposed to GeoNetwork and they don't > just fit - but hey, tell me if you think differently. > > Norman > > On 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Norman / Josh, > > Perhaps GeoNetwork could be extended (if they're not already > working on it)? > > http://geonetwork-opensource.org/technical_spec/document_view > > > Bruce > > --------------------------------------- > > Bruce Bannerman > IT Solutions Architect - GIS > > Department of Primary Industries - Australia > > > End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 40, Issue 9 ***************************************** _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
