Abstract
Metadata management is an essential enabling factor for geospatial assets because discovery, retrieval, and actual usage of the latter are tightly bound to the quality of these descriptions. Unfortunately, the multi-faceted landscape of metadata formats, requirements, and conventions makes it difficult to identify editing tools that can be easily tailored to the specificities of a given project, workgroup, and Community of Practice. Our solution is a template-driven metadata editing tool that can be customised to any XML-based schema. Its output is constituted by standards-compliant metadata records that also have a semantics-aware counterpart eliciting novel exploitation techniques. Moreover, external data sources can easily be plugged in to provide autocompletion functionalities on the basis of the data structures made available on the Web of Data. Beside presenting the essentials on customisation of the editor by means of two use cases, we extend the methodology to the whole life cycle of geospatial metadata. We demonstrate the novel capabilities enabled by RDF-based metadata representation with respect to traditional metadata management in the geospatial domain.
Highlights
Retrieval of assets on the Web primarily relies on the metadata describing them
Being a national project, the RITMARE SDI is bound to the rules set by INSPIRE as well as by RNDT: metadata management has a key role in the required architecture [31,32]
It should be noted that, these use cases stem from the requirements posed by project RITMARE, they are significant in the broader scope of geospatial metadata management
Summary
Data portals can articulate search mechanisms on the basis of these descriptions, with degrees of expressiveness that are dependent on the granularity of the metadata schema governing their structure Among assets, those related to geospatial information are relying almost entirely on metadata for retrieval, often dubbed as discovery, because assets are typically in non-textual format and the indexing practices of generalist search engines are inefficient at best. Those related to geospatial information are relying almost entirely on metadata for retrieval, often dubbed as discovery, because assets are typically in non-textual format and the indexing practices of generalist search engines are inefficient at best This category of data is characterised by properties (e.g., the geographic extent, a.k.a. the bounding box) that require standard metadata in order to be encoded and processed by the specific-purpose tools in this domain [1,2,3].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
