-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Convert draft Part 2 candidate Standard to metanorma asciidoc #346
Comments
A note that the Motion is in this recording, from the Goyang meeting, at 02:33:38 https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=109818 (portal log-in required). |
Thanks @ghobona . When do you expect to start or be done with this conversion to metanorma? We're planning to meet this Thursday probably to work on Common. We could either review the Part 2 (Collections / UMD) content if the conversion is already done, or re-organize the content beyond these out of Part 2 to future proposed parts. Part 3 could be "Schemas" (matching Features - Part 5, with work on-going for full synchronization, allowing e.g. Coverages and DGGS to reference a "Common" requirements class rather than a Features one). Part 4 could include everything else which is all about filtering Note regarding "15. Encoding Requirement Classes", we can probably get rid of these requirement classes completely since the Common JSON / HTML requirement classes could be used to indicate support for JSON and HTML for the Part 2 resources. 16 - media types and 17 - security considerations probably need to remain in all parts (though could be moved earlier). |
I have just finished converting the content to metanorma asciidoc. It will take a few more days for the cron job to be updated at docs.ogc.org/DRAFTS. I will post a message here when the cron job has been updated. In the meantime, here are some actions: Action 1 Please look into the following:
The same issue of missing requirements affects a few more abstract tests. NOTE: Metanorma automatically creates hyperlinks for existing requirements, so if a requirement's identifier is not appearing as a link it means that the requirement was not found. Action 2 Please add content for Abstract Test /conf/umd-collection/extent-uad-definition. |
Thanks @ghobona . I see the content https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogcapi-common/tree/master/collections is now metanorma, so we can focus on reviewing this content tomorrow and work on the metanorma version from now on. Did you move the content of the other sections somewhere else or juste delete it? (a We can run metanorma locally, so the cron job is not an issue. |
@jerstlouis The content of the other sections is archived here. |
Thanks @ghobona . We've revived the content of Sections 10-14 under Regarding action items 1 & 2, those are all about the ATS which was not reviewed / updated at all, so we will probably review / finalize the main content of the requirements classes first before updating the ATS. We've also untagged from Part 2 / removed issues from the Part 2 projects things related to the future Part 3 & 4 (new tags created to keep track of those). Still quite a large number of open issues (the majority) about Part 2 that we need to go through. |
We need to convert the Part 2 candidate Standard to metanorma asciidoc.
I have taken a snapshot of the repo ahead of the conversion to metanorma asciidoc.
The next step will be to convert the document.
Please also note that at the OGC Member Meeting in November 2024, in Goyang, the following Motion was passed:
The OGC API - Common SWG proposes to limit the scope of Part 2: Geospatial Data to the requirement classes Collections and Uniform Additional Dimensions, with the remaining requirement classes being considered for future parts.
Therefore the metanorma-based document will be created to be consistent with the above-mentioned Motion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: