opengeospatial / opengeospatial/CoverageJSON

Should there be restrictive profiles of CoverageJSON?

Open
#161 4 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Priority 2 profile V1.2
Dominant language
HTML
Stars
15
Forks
8
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

As JSON and CoverageJSON are very flexible, some user communities feel the need to specify restrictive profile(s) of the OGC Community Standard.
I have said specifically 'restrictive'. Profiles that extend the standard should be addressed by future versions of the standard, such as V1.1, V1.2, V2.0 etc.
V1.x versions would be fully backward compatible with the existing V1.0.
V2.0 etc versions would not be backward compatible.
Corrections of errors will be addressed in V1.0.x versions.

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

The issue names no files, tests, or implementation entry points. Start by reviewing the CoverageJSON and OGC Community Standard material referenced in the discussion, then establish whether restrictive profiles belong in the current standard; done requires a decided profile policy and documented versioning impact.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
json
Domain
documentation
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.