Specify how metadata is to be represented in each file type #3
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @rod-glover this is great content and I'd like to keep this PR available for when we do the next 'layer' of data guidance. I think this is also valuable for casting against existing data, which in many cases doesn't adher to these (good) standards. However, I think this is may be too prescriptive for this high-ish level data standards document..? Mostly I am thinking that if we go to this level with this one standard category, we'd have to go equivalently deep in the other categories, which could make document extremely comprehensive, but unwieldy. We may also paint ourselves into a corner, where we become forced to prescribe any/all details. Meh?
|
Yup, that's a danger alright. I understand your concerns. Possibly you could place more detailed requirements in separate documents ... and maybe get away with not specifying everything to the same level of detail. Then refer to those documents where appropriate in this one. Given Markdown/GitHub's ability to link documents, you might be able to keep and "publish" all that right here in this repo. |
|
That would be super cool! By linking do you mean basically publishing multiple docs in this repo, then hyperlinking between them? |
|
Yes, exactly. |
This is a WIP, very tentative. I don't know much about GeoTIFF and Shapefile, so I slowed down there. This can perhaps be used for discussion however.