•SmartOpenData&INSPIRE

martin.tuchyna@sazp.sk

17.06.2014, INSPIRE Conference,

INSPIRE and Linked Open Data for Environment Protection – The SmartOpenData Project Approach WS, Aalborg, Denmark

SmartOpenData Workshop @

•1. Background and motivation of the SmartOpenData Project

•2. Combining geospatial and linked data: status and opportunities

•3. INSPIRE (MIG) & SmartOpenData

•4. Short presentation of the pilots: Problems encountered, achieved

outcomes

•5. Community building, exploitations and liaisons

•3. Linkage of SmartOpenData with INSPIRE MIG

martin.tuchyna@sazp.sk

INSPIRE MIG in nutshell

•INSPIRE Maintenance and

Implementation Group (MIG)

•EC & MSs & stakeholders

driven framework to support

INSPIRE

•Two pernament groups

(policy&technical)

•Currently identified 20 top

priority areas of focus (with actions)

More info:

• http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/index.cfm/pageid/5160

• https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/mig-inspire/wiki

Contribution of SmOD to INSPIRE MIG

•MIWP-4: Managing and using http URIs for INSPIRE identifiers

•Sharing best practice incl. identified issues

•MIWP-5: Validation and conformity testing

• Contribution to the activities of the WG (Tomas Kliment)

(e.g.Evaluating existing tools for INSPIRE validation, OWL vs.

UML & RDF vs. GML transformation validation)

•MIWP-6: Registries and registers

•Utilizing the INSPIRE Registry, sharing experience with the

other registries implementations

•MIWP-19: Explore and improvement on the situation of

controlled vocabularies in the framework of INSPIRE

•Sharing the experience with implementation of geo related

ontologies

Benefits of SmOD from INSPIRE MIG

•WP2: Requirements and Architecture

•Reusing relevant interoperability assets (e.g.registers)

•WP3: Data modelling and Linked Open Data (LOD) alignment

•Input for relevant standards and specifications

•Representing features and coverages as linked data

•Versioning and specific conversion rules

•WP5: Demonstration Pilots

• INSPIRE metada, spatial datasets and services

• INSPIRE licencing framework

•WP6: Evaluation, Assessment and User groups

•WP7: Dissemination, Exploitation and Liaisons

+

Are3na related activities:

•RDF and PIDs for Location

SmOD & INSPIRE MIG questions

•Does indicated contribution of SmOD fits to the needs of MIG?

•Are there missing some important links?

•Which of the identified issues deserves the highest attention?

•?

•4. Community requirements for SK pilot

martin.tuchyna@sazp.sk

SK pilots

SubPilot 1: Spatial Web Crawler:

•Serching and providing geospatial content and functionality

between SDI and Linked Data environment

SubPilot 2: Biodiversity MashUp Linked Open Data Extension

•Extending existing Biodiversity MashUp app with linked data

support and provide example of linking INSPIRE data to support

citizens and decision makers to investigate, what kind of

biodiversity potential as well as environmental risks can be

identified in the area of their interest.

SK pilots architecture

SK pilots architecture

SK pilots questions

•Do you like the idea?

• Is there something missing?

• Where the pilots could be improved?

• Are there some other (better) use cases to be taken into the

consideration?

•5. Community building & networking

martin.tuchyna@sazp.sk

Networking set up (proposal)

•Stakeholders as user groups & Liasons

Networking offer & demand

•SmartOpenData project offer:

•Provision of space for knowledge exchange (e.g.Workshops)

•Open linked geo data (incl. metadata)

•Consult SmartOpenData data model

•Possibility to shape the demonstration pilots

•Contribution to the liasons in standardisation of the landscape around geospatial data on the Web

•SmartOpenData project expectations

•Stakeholder’s feedback on published outcomes and foreseen

above mentioned activities

•Where relevant disseminate the project outcomes

•Participation on stakeholder’s related group activities

Networking: Questions on the table

•Is there an need for user (stakeholders) group/community

support at all?

• If so, what kind of support deserves highest priority?

• What else the project can offer to the stakeholders interested

in linking of geodata?

• What else the stakeholders can bring in return?