opengeospatial / opengeospatial/CoverageJSON
Comparison of CoverageJSON with ISO19123 (both 2005 and draft 2022)
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 15
- Forks
- 8
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I have extracted most of the key assertions/statements from the ISO 19115:2005 (also known as OGC Abstract Topic 6) into this AsciiDoc file with view to constructing a comparison table. I envisage columns for CoverageJSON, GeoTIFF and CIS JSON.
@jerstlouis What do you think of this approach? I can also produce the assertions from the proposed revised CD19115
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with Comparisons/CompareToISO19123-1.adoc and review the extracted ISO 19115:2005 assertions. Clarify the proposed comparison scope, then determine how CoverageJSON, GeoTIFF, and CIS JSON should be represented; completion would be a comparison table and, if agreed, assertions from the proposed revised CD19115.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100