How to refer to legislations different from those in the applicable legislation codelist - The case of Priority Datasets

[jescriu]

This issue is reported by the ISO & GeoDCAT-AP Pilot.

As agreed today during the Kick-off meeting of Working Team T-1A of the ISO & GeoDCAT-AP Pilot, we proceed to open this issue identified in INSPIRE-MIF/GeoDCAT-AP-pilot#2.

The community needs to investigate a common an agreed procedure to refer other legislations different from those currently considered in the applicable legislation codelist, e.g., the ODD/HVD ELI-codes - This is needed in the INSPIRE context to categorise geospatial datasets (and dataset series) identified by Member States as Priority Datasets, based on the values currently foreseen in the Priority Datasets metadata code list:
https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/PriorityDataset

Example: https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/PriorityDataset/dir-1999-31

OPTIONS:

Option 1. Extend the applicable legislation codelist with the required values, if considered formally correct for this codelist (from a conceptual / modelisation perspective) + Reuse the applicable legislation property included in GeoDCAT-AP.

Option 2. Reuse the existing Priority Datasets metadata code list + Agree on a procedure on how to use it in GeoDCAT-AP.

Feedback from the community is welcome.

[jakubklimek]

@jescriu applicable legislation values are not from a codelist. They are ELIs - IRIs of pieces of (any ELI-compliant) legislation. For your example, the value would be http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/31/oj, see:

So only guidance on which legislation (and its ELI) is important/relevant should be necessary.

[akuckartz]

There are numerous municipalities with numerous local legislations. I do not think that a single codelist for all of them is manageable.

[akuckartz]

Not all legislations issued by municipalities are ELI-compliant.

[jakubklimek]

Again, to clarify, ELI is not a codelist; it is a system of identifying legislation using IRIs. It is implemented at least on the Europan and (some?) member state level.

The current applicable legislation is limited to the ELI-compliant ones.
If support is to be added for other legislation, the questions are

1. Does indicating the legislation that is not compliant with ELI contribute to interoperability of the metadata records? What is the use case for the user/reader of the record? Do they need to know that there is local legislation related to the data?
2. What are examples of such records, and what needs to be said about the legislation?
3. Is this geospatial data specific, or should it be dealt with at the DCAT-AP level?

[sMorrone]

The section A.7.8.1 Topic category and keyword in datasets and dataset series in the GeoDCAT-AP v3.1.0 specification states that "Keywords associated with controlled vocabularies are mapped to dcat:theme". This is exactly the case of the INSPIRE Priority datasets. They should therefore be mapped by reusing the related INSPIRE codelist values in the dcat:theme element. Furthermore, this mapping is already implemented in the current SEMIC reference XSLT and is applied, for example, by the EEA SDI GeoNetwork instance, which reuses the XSLT via the EU-geodcat-ap-semiceu formatter to convert its INSPIRE metadata into GeoDCAT-AP.