Non-standard namespaces in INSPIRE #985
-
Hello, I have a short question regarding namespaces: is it legal to use additional namespaces when providing 2 datasets for one featureType? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 7 comments
-
From the XML/GML side of things, these alternative namespaces shouldn't be an issue |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Dear @CLinGBA, |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Dear @sMorrone, we need different namespaces, because we want to provide the the same feature type in different scales and if we wanted to do this via GeoServer (& WFS) we have to use isolated workspaces. And if we do that we get as an output <ge1:GeologicUnit ... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Dear @CLinGBA , I am moving this issue to the Validator helpdesk for more specific support. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Dear @CLinGBA, |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm sorry, right now we don't have any example. We tested this 2021 when we opened the issue. Since the the validator did not approve the output, we switched to a different solution, without a WFS But for High-value datasets it is probably needed again so it would be good if the validator approves non-standard namespaces/prefixes like ge1:XXX |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Dear @CLinGBA, I confirm that the Validator does not raise errors if non-standard namespaces/prefixes are used. In the following zip file you can find an example dataset and its validation report: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Dear @CLinGBA,
I confirm that the Validator does not raise errors if non-standard namespaces/prefixes are used.
In the following zip file you can find an example dataset and its validation report:
ge-core_sample_additional_namespace.zip