INSPIRE marine pilot Final meeting phase 1 24.10.2016, Ispra

AGENDA ITEM DOC Time Welcome and introductions   Introductory lecture: The Dutch Information House Marine and the MSFD 24/10 14:00 Approval of the agenda 15:00 Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting 3 15:05 (4) Guidelines for sharing marine spatial data 4 15:15 (5) Workflow for publishing monitoring data using INSPIRE 5 16:15 (6) INSPIRE, Fitness Check and MSFD 6 25/10 09:00 (7) “Hand-over” of the Marine pilot 11:00 (8) Feedback from events and meetings 12:00 (9) Any Other Business

AGENDA ITEM DOC Time Welcome and introductions   Introductory lecture: The Dutch Information House Marine and the MSFD 24/10 14:00 Approval of the agenda 15:00 Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting 3 15:05 (4) Guidelines for sharing marine spatial data 4 15:15 (5) Workflow for publishing monitoring data using INSPIRE 5 16:15 (6) INSPIRE, Fitness Check and MSFD 6 25/10 09:00 (7) “Hand-over” of the Marine pilot 11:00 (8) Feedback from events and meetings 12:00 (9) Any Other Business

AGENDA ITEM DOC Time Welcome and introductions   Introductory lecture: The Dutch Information House Marine and the MSFD 24/10 14:00 Approval of the agenda 15:00 Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting 3 15:05 (4) Guidelines for sharing marine spatial data 4 15:15 (5) Workflow for publishing monitoring data using INSPIRE 5 16:15 (6) INSPIRE, Fitness Check and MSFD 6 25/10 09:00 (7) “Hand-over” of the Marine pilot 11:00 (8) Feedback from events and meetings 12:00 (9) Any Other Business

AGENDA ITEM DOC Time Welcome and introductions   Introductory lecture: The Dutch Information House Marine and the MSFD 24/10 14:00 Approval of the agenda 15:00 Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting 3 15:05 (4) Guidelines for sharing marine spatial data 4 15:15 (5) Workflow for publishing monitoring data using INSPIRE 5 16:15 (6) INSPIRE, Fitness Check and MSFD 6 25/10 09:00 (7) “Hand-over” of the Marine pilot 11:00 (8) Feedback from events and meetings 12:00 (9) Any Other Business

Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting Action ID What Who When Status 201604-01 send the draft script of the marine video around for comments PSM 2016-04-21 Done 02 Inform relevant people in DG ENV about the request from NL and DE to not to have to report the data underlying the MSFD reporting if they implement INSPIRE-based solutions for the data sets concerned. 2016-05-03 Done (INSPIRE CT meeting of 3/5) 03 Feedback on video ALL 2016-05-05 04 Provision of the revised script of the marine video to the contractor for the video production. CAT, PSM 05 Make available the MSFD assessment guidance LMA   06 JRC to revise the structure of the guidelines and send that around for comments. 2016-05-13 07 All to comment on the structure of the guidelines 2016-05-19 Action combined with actions 13 and 17 08 Include the review of the MSFD assessment guidance in the action plan for the current phase of the marine pilot. PSM/CAT Waiting decision PSG

Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting Action ID What Who When Status 09 Identify points in the MSFD assessment guidance that could be revisited based on the experience in the marine pilot. ALL 2016-05-31   10 Update the website of the marine pilot CAT In progress 11 Confirm to PSM the participation of FR in the marine pilot FNA 12 An activity will be set-up to integrate the monitoring stations spatial objects with the measurement data for NL context where these two datasets are provided by different entities. MGR, PSM, JST Open 13 JRC to provide a first version of the guidelines CAT, PSM 2016-06-10 Done 14 The overall workflow including the exploitation of the exposed services with a sample JavaScript web client will be documented on pilot website and made available as open source software. 2016-06-30 In progress, see action 10 15 Check how the Cefas data hub can be linked to the UK open data portal and to the national and therefore EU INSPIRE geoportals MNI Done (next slide) 16 JRC to organize meeting on roof data flow. Invite all RSCs. PSM Waiting for decision PSG 17 All to comment on the guidelines 2016-10-17  Done

CEFAS data hub (action 15) Cefas publishes metadata via the Cefas Data Hub, as shown in the previous presentation. Cefas have set up harvesters to allow MEDIN and data.gov.uk to collect proportion of this metadata flagged with appropriate keywords. This is how we populate our entries on these respective portals. Further from that, the metadata schema we use for the data.gov.uk triggers DGU to send our metadata further on to the INSPIRE geoportal. Some other portals are also populated this way. I’m sure you have already noticed that not all of our metadata currently on INSPIRE geoportal is relevant to this location. I’m afraid at the we have implemented only a single metadata schema to feed into data.gov. More is possible and that extension is on the development plan, but is very much subject to availability of funds.

AGENDA ITEM DOC Time Welcome and introductions   Introductory lecture: The Dutch Information House Marine and the MSFD 24/10 14:00 Approval of the agenda 15:00 Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting 3 15:05 (4) Guidelines for sharing marine spatial data 4 15:15 (5) Workflow for publishing monitoring data using INSPIRE 5 16:15 (6) INSPIRE, Fitness Check and MSFD 6 25/10 09:00 (7) “Hand-over” of the Marine pilot 11:00 (8) Feedback from events and meetings 12:00 (9) Any Other Business

Guidelines Comments on recommendations In the context of the EU legislation, a shared public registry including all the EU directives should be setup and used to classify any information which is related to the directives.   [AA1]Should be recommended to use EUROLEX registry Recommendation 12: The correct value to put in this filed is the CRS of the data setting the CRS field with the http URI according to the EPGS Geodedic Parameter Registry (http://www.epsg-registry.org/) even if this will not be validated by the INSPIRE geoportal validation service .  [CM1]If this is a mandatory field, why wouldn’t it be validated? Recommendation 16:   For the identification of the target data themes and related feature types of interest it’s suggested to consult the reference thematic communities including: Thematic clusters discussions (https://themes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/) EMODnet and related data portals  to exploit the “Find your scope” tool published on the INSPIRE official web site in the Interactive Data specification section (http://inspire-regadmin.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dataspecification/)  [AA1]EMODnet bullet: I would delete this bullet , as in this moment EMODnet do not provide any information on INSPIRE target data themes

Guidelines Comments on recommendations  [AA1]I would not recommend to neither thematic communities this option, as there are lots of issues coming from it – e.g. data spec of extensions, extension semantics, who is using extended model, etc…. Also we did not try to do this in the scope of the project. Comments on recommendations Recommendation 17: In data model extension process, it’s recommended to be performed by ICT specialized resources in strict collaboration with thematic experts. An additional support is done by the INSPIRE thematic Cluster collecting the experiences and the solutions provided by other stakeholders.   [CM1]I think the thematic cluster can be classed as a “reference knowledge base” (as it is under Recommendation 24) but not as a support mechanism as responses are often supplied by others trying to carry out the same task.  [laers1]This process is not supposed to be a process that each MS has to follow – if it is necessary to extend a data model it has to be done one time and then made available through the INSPIRE Registry.  [JK1]This is a big challenge.  [laers1]Who is responsible for the creating of this registry? Recommendation 18: It’s necessary to well define the meaning of the data content by the share of common registry  with the possible code-lists and the well-defined description for each code-value (possibly in multi-language). Recommendation 19: The code-lists should contain information about the comparability of the data , regardless of the methodology used for the collection of values.  [laers1]Is a code list suitable for information about comparability – should metadata not provide such kind of information?

Guidelines Comments on recommendations  [CM1]Is this even possible? If methods and processes are outlined, these cannot always be applied to produce comparable data values- especially true of contaminants and chlor-a. Recommendation 20:   in situation like the Marine pilot, where a directive (MSFD) request the collection of value related to some environmental parameters, it should be detailed the methodologies and the processes to be applied to produce comparable data values.   [JK1]This has been solved in RSCs by developing a regionally specific guideline, e.g. the COMBINE manual for chl-a measurements. http://www.helcom.fi/action-areas/monitoring-and-assessment/manuals-and-guidelines/combine-manual/ The reported data contains metadata on methods used. Recommendation 21: INSPIRE thematic cluster have to be used by the scientific communities like the reference platform where submitting also the discussion about meaning of data content to increase the semantic interoperability of the shared data.   [JK1]What would be the procedure for this? How RSCs and EMODnet would fit in to this? In RSCs methods are developed in domain expert groups and agreed by all Contracting parties.

Guidelines – general main comments [FN]This guideline should be more operational to be appropriated by WG DIKE and TG Data, and furthermore we could expect that the referential data and data models (and standard) should be proposed in working groups to be improved [FN]We are attending too that the reports formats for MSFD should be supported by this guideline [IS]Nearly all the document is general stuff and does not try to solve the problems of the marine community. There are a few hints in the document that this is the case but they are somewhat buried amongst more general issues. [IS] There were other issues, such as the lack of instruction on extending INSPIRE models

Guidelines – Other main comments [JK] This is figure does not take into account the reporting that goes to RSCs. This is relevant to MSFD since RSC indicators can be used in the MSFD assessment. “For instance, EMODnet has the potential to contribute through three main actions: by using data from multiple INSPIRE-compliant services across MS; by collecting and transforming marine data for MS to distribute through their national INSPIRE infrastructure; and, more in general, by delivering INSPIRE compliance on behalf of MS.”   [JK] This is very essential! Can and will EMODnet take the responsibility to implement and the INSPIRE req. such as NS on behalf of the marine authorities in the MS? And if yes in which infrastructure / IT-arhitecture will the implementation take place? And above it is stated that EMODnet has the potential – but is there a decision or agreement?

Guidelines – Other main comments “The two tested client software (QGIS and ArcGIS) translate the WFS output into a flat table and both are not able to rebuild the GML      [LS] This is one of the main problem related to the general INSPIRE-implementation. It is difficult to demand an implementation of services providing data sets that cannot be read and presented correctly in user applications like GIS-software. Flattering is a solution but does data then interoperable…? “It’s clear that there are many rules and guidelines to be refined and upgraded  but this starting point can strongly contribute to the definition of a concrete operational shared geospatial infrastructure (SDI) supporting the environmental monitoring and reporting as well as other e-Government processes”   [LS] This is a strong statement in the conclusion. Of course INSPIREs framework, data models etc. has be maintained in order to full fill user demands also in the future. Please be aware of the ongoing MIG action 2016.1 (Fitness for purpose) which aiming to make INSPIREs data models etc. more implementation- and user friendly. In scope is guidance material as well as legal text, IRs).

AGENDA ITEM DOC Time Welcome and introductions   Introductory lecture: The Dutch Information House Marine and the MSFD 24/10 14:00 Approval of the agenda 15:00 Review of actions and adoption of the minutes of the previous meeting 3 15:05 (4) Guidelines for sharing marine spatial data 4 15:15 (5) Workflow for publishing monitoring data using INSPIRE 5 16:15 (6) INSPIRE, Fitness Check and MSFD 6 25/10 09:00 (7) “Hand-over” of the Marine pilot 11:00 (8) Feedback from events and meetings 12:00 (9) Any Other Business