1. INSPIRE – What if...? Workshop at OGC meeting in Delft
Michael Lutz INSPIRE MIG-T meeting #38 Ghent March 2017
Copyright © 2017 Open Geospatial Consortium

2. Copyright © 2017 Open Geospatial Consortium
Agenda
Welcome and Introduction
Setting the scene: Flash presentation of position statements (3 min and 1 slide per presenter)
Break-out groups – World Café (2 rounds of min)
What standards and technologies should the infrastructure be based on?
What architectural pattern would you recommend? What should be the main components of the infrastructure?
How would you organise the implementation process and make it cost-efficient?
How would you ensure a wide adoption and use of the infrastructure?
Reports to plenary
Wrap-up and conclusions
Copyright © 2017 Open Geospatial Consortium

3. Copyright © 2017 Open Geospatial Consortium
Material
Workshop website:
all material will be available there
we will provide a summary through TC-Announce and on the OGC website
Copyright © 2017 Open Geospatial Consortium

5. Architecture
Discovery services are a key component, but they need to be made more accessible to mainstream search engines
produce also DCAT-AP, HTML, schema.org
full ISO profile is sometimes too complicated - have simpler profiles/formats for certain use cases
also include pointers to more complex schemas for additonal MD information
Need for both complex and simple schemas
they serve different purposes
mapping from complex to simple schema needs to be explicit

6. Architecture
Documentation on how simple schemas have been derived from complex models
Follow-up actions:
project/workshop/hackathon on how to develop simpler data schemas from complex models
also involve possible users, not only data providers

7. Technologies and standards
Keep the existing approach, in particular the more conceptual ones - vocabularies and conceptual data models
Make it simpler to conform
Simple feature encodings for use - incl. links for full information if required
provide RESTful APIs and JSON in addition to existing APIs
Need for good documentation and examples
Success criterion: how long does it take to be able to use spatial data, after accessing it
Use of derefernceable URIs - not just for data, but also for data models
have it also for spatial object types and properties

8. Technologies and standards
Interoperable security - AAA
Subscription and notification mechanisms
Standardising URI patterns - but there were many concerns…
Need to be careful not to create extra burden for implementers
Also involve "first level" users (i.e. developers)
Follow-up
experiments - accompanied by workshops - get our hands dirty
not a consultation thing…

9. Implementation process
Recommendations:
Integrate into existing products, no separate INSPIRE only infrastructure, extend national models to meet additional INSPIRE requirements
Cost effective: INSPIRE not as something specific, but as a general infrastructure and be a natural part of what we are doing
Competition between INSPIRE and Open Data / Linked Open Data; reconciliate the two movements; Align/Reframe INSPIRE in that context?
Make sure products are designed from the user experience first ("How to provide a bridge in INSPIRE" --> can't be answered by a professional)
Have a library of reference implementations to describe how it's done for all annexes

10. Implementation process
Follow-Up Actions:
Collect reference implementations as concrete guides and publish those
Provide different compliance levels as a means to get started with INSPIRE implementation easily
Find how to react to new uses cases in an agile way

11. Adoption and use Not only for (end) users but also data providers
5-star system of adoption
Governance aspects
articulate market cases - need for a sustainable buisness model
interoperabilty should not be the ultimate goal, but rather use!
need to advertise success more openly
need to be able to measure - define success factors [REC] and start measuring them (not number of hits!)

12. Conclusions No revolutionary ideas!
"Noone knows what will be the future will bring"
Make sure the infrastructure is flexible to allow for technological change
Base changes on experimentation
Define success factors (not just compliance)