CEN/TR 15449:2011

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-november-2011
1DGRPHãþD
SIST-TP CEN/TR 15449:2006
*HRJUDIVNHLQIRUPDFLMH6WDQGDUGLVSHFLILNDFLMHWHKQLþQDSRURþLODLQVPHUQLFH
SRWUHEQL]DLPSOHPHQWDFLMRLQIUDVWUXNWXU]DSURVWRUVNHSRGDWNH
Geographic information - Standards, specifications, technical reports and guidelines,
required to implement Spatial Data Infrastructures
Geoinformation - Normen, Spezifikationen, technische Berichte und Leitfäden zur
Einführung von Geodateninfrastrukturen
Information géographique - Normes, spécifications, rapports techniques et lignes
directrices, nécessaires à la mise en oeuvre d'une infrastructure d'information spatiale
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: CEN/TR 15449:2011
ICS:
07.040 Astronomija. Geodezija. Astronomy. Geodesy.
Geografija Geography
35.240.70 Uporabniške rešitve IT v IT applications in science
znanosti
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

TECHNICAL REPORT
CEN/TR 15449
RAPPORT TECHNIQUE
TECHNISCHER BERICHT
August 2011
ICS 07.040; 35.240.70 Supersedes CEN/TR 15449:2006
English Version
Geographic information - Standards, specifications, technical
reports and guidelines, required to implement Spatial Data
Infrastructures
Information géographique - Normes, spécifications, Geoinformation - Normen, Spezifikationen, technische
rapports techniques et lignes directrices, nécessaires à la Berichte und Leitfäden zur Einführung von
mise en oeuvre d'une infrastructure d'information spatiale Geodateninfrastrukturen
bonne fin de journée
This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 8 November 2010. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 287.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels
© 2011 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. CEN/TR 15449:2011: E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

Contents Page
FOREWORD . 5
0 INTRODUCTION . 6
0.1 SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURES. 6
0.2 INTENDED READERSHIP . 6
0.3 AIM OF THE REPORT. 6
1 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY . 8
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . 10
2 SCOPE . 11
3 NORMATIVE REFERENCES . 11
4 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS . 11
5 ABBREVIATED TERMS . 13
6 SDI INTEROPERABILITY . 14
6.1 INTRODUCTION . 14
6.2 STANDARDS AND INTEROPERABILITY . 14
6.3 GENERIC ARCHITECTURE MODEL . 16
6.4 DATA-CENTRIC VERSUS SERVICE-CENTRIC . 19
6.5 SDI AS A DYNAMIC FRAMEWORK . 19
7 REFERENCE MODEL FOR A SDI . 21
7.1 INTRODUCTION . 21
7.2 FRAMEWORK STANDARDS . 23
7.3 SPATIAL DATA . 23
7.3.1 Reference data/thematic data . 23
7.3.2 Coverages . 24
7.4 METADATA AND CATALOGUE SERVICES (INCLUDING REGISTRY) . 25
7.4.1 Overview . 25
7.4.2 Abstract models . 27
7.4.3 Implementation Specifications . 28
7.4.4 Service metadata and registries . 28
7.5 GEOGRAPHIC HUMAN INTERACTION SERVICES . 28
7.5.1 Overview . 28
7.5.2 Abstract models . 29
7.5.3 Implementation Specifications . 29
7.6 REFERENCE DATA – CO-ORDINATE REFERENCES AND GEOSPATIAL IDENTIFIERS . 30
7.6.1 General . 30
7.6.2 Coordinates . 30
7.6.3 Place names and identifiers . 31
7.6.4 Related services . 32
7.7 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . 33
8 DATA-CENTRIC VIEW ON SDI. 33
8.1 INTRODUCTION . 33
8.2 DEVELOPMENT . 34
8.2.1 The model-driven approach . 34
8.2.2 Semantics . 34
8.2.3 Application schema . 35
8.2.4 Conceptual schema language . 36
8.2.5 Encoding . 37
8.2.6 Relevant standards . 37
8.3 DATA MANAGEMENT . 39
8.3.1 Metadata . 39
8.3.2 Accessing data . 39
8.3.3 Legacy datasets . 40
8.3.4 Consistent identification of geographical items . 40
8.3.5 Thematic identifiers . 40
8.4 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . 41
9 SERVICE-CENTRIC VIEW . 41
9.1 INTRODUCTION . 41
9.2 REGISTRIES AS THE SDI GLUE . 42
9.3 PUBLISH, FIND AND USE RESOURCES . 44
9.3.1 Introduction . 44
9.3.2 Publishing geo-resources . 44
9.3.3 Finding geo-resources . 45
9.3.4 Using geo-resources . 45
9.4 INTEROPERABILITY . 45
9.4.1 General . 45
9.4.2 Different types of interoperability . 46
9.5 SERVICE TAXONOMY . 46
9.6 SERVICE ARCHITECTURE . 47
9.6.1 Introduction . 47
9.6.2 Web services . 47
9.6.3 Services that do not use Web Service Architecture (WSA) . 48
9.6.4 Application of Web Service Architecture . 48
9.7 SERVICE CATALOGUE . 48
9.8 SERVICE CHAINING . 48
9.9 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . 49
10 CULTURAL AND LINGUISTIC ADAPTABILITY . 49
10.1 INTRODUCTION . 49
10.2 IMPACT ON SDIS . 50
10.2.1 General . 50
10.2.2 Multilingual resource discovery . 52
10.2.3 Multilingual evaluation of resources. 53
10.2.4 Multilingual access and processing of resources . 54
11 GEO-POR TALS . 54
11.1 INTRODUCTION . 54
11.2 CONSIDERATIONS FOR PORTAL DEVELOPMENT . 54
12 IMPLEMENTATION STEERING MECHANISMS . 55
12.1 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN . 55
12.2 MONITORING . 56
12.3 CONFORMANCE AND CONFORMANCE TESTING . 56
12.3.1 General . 56
12.3.2 EN ISO 19105 . 56
12.3.3 Open Geospatial Consortium . 57
12.3.4 Requirements for conformance testing . 57
12.4 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . 58
13 REQUIREMENTS NOT CURRENTLY COVERED SUFFICIENTLY BY GI STANDARDS . 58
ANNEX A (INFORMATIVE) DESCRIPTION OF REFERENCED ISO STANDARDS . 60
ANNEX B (INFORMATIVE) CEN/TC 287 AND ISO/TC 211 STANDARDS . 62
ANNEX C (INFORMATIVE) OPEN GEOSPATIAL CONSORTIUM SPECIFICATIONS . 65
ANNEX D (INFORMATIVE) INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SPATIAL INFORMATION IN EUROPE . 67
BIBLIOGR APHY . 71

Foreword
This document has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 287 “Geographic information”, the
secretariat of which is held by BSI.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. CEN [and/or CENELEC] shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This document supersedes CEN/TR 15449:2006.

0 Introduction
0.1 Spatial Data Infrastructures
Spatial data infrastructure (SDI) is a general term for the computerised environment for handling data that
relates to a position on or near the surface of the earth. It may be defined in a range of ways, in different
circumstances, from the local up to the global level.
For example, the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) in the context of the Global Earth Observation System
of Systems (GEOSS) refers to the definition adopted by the Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI)
Association, in which a SDI
“encompasses the policies, organizational remits, data, technologies, standards, delivery mechanisms,
and financial and human resources necessary to ensure that those working at the global and regional
scale are not impeded in meeting their objectives”.
Likewise, the United Nations SDI (UNSDI) initiative defines SDI as an “umbrella” of policies, standards and
procedures under which organizations and technologies interact to foster more efficient use, management and
production of geo-spatial data.
The European Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007
establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) defines a SDI as:
“the metadata, spatial data sets and spatial data services; network services and technologies;
agreements on sharing, access and use; and coordination and monitoring mechanisms, processes
and procedures, established, operated or made available in an interoperable manner”.
This Technical Report adopts the INSPIRE definition. It focuses on the technical aspects of a SDI, thereby
limiting the term SDI to mean an implementation neutral technological infrastructure for geospatial data and
services, based upon standards and specifications. This report does not consider a SDI as a carefully
designed and dedicated information system; rather, it is viewed as a collaborative framework of disparate
information systems that contain resources that stakeholders desire to share. The common denominator of
SDI resources, which can be data or services, is their spatial nature. It is understood that the framework is in
constant evolution, and that therefore the requirements for standards and specifications supporting SDI
implementations evolve.
0.2 Intended readership
The intended readership of this report are those people who are responsible for creating frameworks for SDI,
experts contributing to INSPIRE, experts in information and communication technologies and e-government
that need to familiarize themselves with geographic information and SDI concepts, and standards developers
and writers.
0.3 Aim of the report
The aims of this report are three-fold:
 to identify the standards, specifications, technical reports and guidelines, required to implement a
SDI in Europe;
 to give recommendations as to whether any of these items should become European standards
(ENs), and to propose a roadmap for future work items;
 to provide recommendations for measures to be taken in order to support implementation and
maintenance of a SDI.
Existing material about SDIs abounds. The criteria used for determining if a given standard or specification is
referred to in this report are:
 the publication addresses an aspect of the SDI; and
 the publication is non- proprietary in nature.
Based on these considerations, the following reports have been taken into account:
 legal texts and guidelines produced in the context of INSPIRE;
 documents produced by ISO/TC 211;
 documents produced by the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), including the OpenGIS
Reference Model (ORM) (OGC, 2003);
 the European Interoperability Framework and related documents;
 deliverables from the European Union-funded projects (GIGAS, SANY);
 existing national guidelines based on the (EN) ISO 19100 series of standards.
The report covers the main concerns of a SDI in Europe:
 a data-centric and a service-centric view on SDI, brought together in a Reference Model;
 concerns related to multi-lingual and cultural adaptability;
 geo-portals;
 implementation;
 SDI aspects currently not covered by standards.
1 Management summary
In order for standards and specifications to be useful for implementing a SDI in Europe, it needs to be
straightforward to identify which standards are relevant in a particular situation, and the interpretation of
standards should be unambiguous. This Technical Report provides a framework for the identification of
standards, and makes recommendations with the aim of enhancing interoperability between information
systems that provide data and services in support of a SDI. The following paragraphs summarize the
recommendations of this Technical Report.
For the realisation of SDI in Europe, it is recommended that a number of registration authorities are
established. A SDI needs, like any other distributed information system, a reference frame. This is the
aggregation of the data needed by different components of the information systems. In a SDI context, the
reference frame includes:
 units of measures;
 coordinate reference systems;
 codelist definitions;
 encoding schemas;
 feature data dictionaries (see EN ISO 19126);
 feature catalogues (see EN ISO 19110);
 portrayal catalogues and related symbology registers.
Registries are required for these information elements and geographical items, and for:
 cultural and linguistic adaptability of metadata elements;
 European common data models;
 national data which are of interest in a cross-border community or in a multilingual community.
Registries should be conformant to EN ISO 19135, Geographic information — Procedures for item registration
(ISO 19135:2005) where applicable. Organisations which implement a SDI should have a content registration
authority which provides a control body (to decide on the acceptability of proposals for changes to the content
of a register).
In order to enable the cultural and linguistic adaptability (CLA) of metadata and common data models, it is
recommended to use unique names and codes for the information elements and the geographical items (e.g.
feature type). A number of practical suggestions related to CLA are given in Clause 10.
All services should be categorized based around the EN ISO 19119 taxonomy.
Service-oriented architecture or resource-oriented architectures should be applied when the following issues
are considered to be important:
 components of information systems run on different platforms;
 the system consists of components from different vendors;
 the service is to be published and available on the internet;
 wrapping of existing services where these are exposed as web services;
 making existing functionality available for other applications on other platforms.
The use of UML according to ISO/TS 19103 should be used as an SDI conceptual schema language. Object
Constraint Language (OCL) should be used to define requirements and apply constraints to a UML model.
If an information community applies a Conceptual Schema Language other than UML, it is the responsibility of
that information community to map the ISO general feature model to the meta-model of the Conceptual
Schema Language of choice, and to maintain the mapping rules, following the ISO/TS 19103 conformance
statement:
Non-UML schemas shall be considered conformant if there is a well-defined mapping from a model in
the source language into an equivalent model in UML and that this model in UML is conformant.
In order to provide a GML application schema, an application schema should be made by applying a
conceptual schema language, and the GML application schema should be derived from that conceptual model,
applying the rules for mapping from UML as described in Annex E of EN ISO 19136:2009.
It is recommended that CEN/TC 287, in collaboration with ISO/TC 211 and OGC, start to initiate work on the
following items:
 catalogue service;
 XML encoding of portrayal;
 quality aspects of services;
 support for cultural and linguistic adaptability.
It is further recommended that before a given standard or specification be made mandatory in a European or
national legislation, the standard be implemented and tested.
Practical experience with the implementation of a given standard may reveal that a European profile thereof is
needed.
During the period of time that this TR has been under development, a significant amount of work has been
undertaken to develop the semantic web using linked data and related approaches. This will have a significant
impact on this technical report, for example to assess the additional relevant W3C standards and their relation
to CEN/TC 287 and related standards work. It is expected that this will be addressed in a subsequent release
of this TR.
Summary of recommendations
1. Portrayal service standardisation should be developed (in co-operation of ISO/TC 211 and
OGC) especially for view and download services (WMS, WFS and WCS).
2. The registry service of Geodetic codes and parameters should be clearly defined in order to
be used in view and download services of geographic information (in Europe).
3. The document “INSPIRE Metadata Implementing Rules: Technical Guidelines based on
EN ISO 19115 and EN ISO 19119” should be used as the SDI metadata standard for
discovery.
4. EN ISO 19109 and referred standards are adopted as SDI rules for specifying data
structures and semantics.
5. The use of UML according to ISO/TS 19103 should be used as an SDI conceptual schema
language. Object Constraint Language (OCL) should be used to define requirements and
apply constraints to a UML model.
6. EN ISO 19136 (GML) is adopted as the encoding method when transferring geographic data.
7. CEN ISO/TS 19139 is adopted as the encoding method when transferring information related
to geographic data such as metadata, feature catalogues and data dictionaries.
8. The extension for metadata based transfers of geospatial information defined in
CEN ISO/TS 19139 is adopted for transfer of geospatial datasets.
9. There should be transparent access to data through services on the web for SDIs in Europe.
10. Unique identifiers for use in a European SDI should consist of a namespace and an identifier
which is unique within its namespace.
11. Web Service Architecture (WSA), either service-oriented or resource-oriented, should be
applied as appropriate within the overall technical architecture.
12. Key performance indicators should be established for the measurement of the state of
standards in a SDI.
13. Organisations which implement an SDI should have a content registration authority which
provides a conformance role for content (applying the concept of the Registration authority −
as defined in EN ISO 19135, Geographic information — Procedures for item registration
(ISO 19135:2005)).
2 Scope
This Technical Report identifies and describes standards that are required for a spatial data infrastructure
(SDI).
This Technical Report describes a reference model for a spatial data infrastructure, covering framework
standards, metadata and catalogue services and geospatial reference systems. It provides both data-centric
and service-centric views.
This Technical Report discusses issues associated with implementation of a spatial data infrastructure, in
particular cultural and linguistic adaptability and geo-portals, and identifies the standards, technical
specifications, technical reports and guidelines, required to implement a spatial data infrastructure in Europe.
This Technical Report proposes a roadmap for future standards work items, and makes recommendations for
measures to be taken in order to support implementation and maintenance of a spatial data infrastructure.
3 Normative references
Not applicable.
4 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
4.1
conceptual formalism
set of modelling concepts used to describe a conceptual model
[EN ISO 19101:2005]
EXAMPLE UML meta model, EXPRESS meta model.
NOTE One conceptual formalism can be expressed in several conceptual schema languages.
4.2
conceptual model
model that defines concepts of a universe of discourse
[EN ISO 19101:2005]
4.3
conceptual schema
formal description of a conceptual model
[EN ISO 19101:2005]
4.4
conceptual schema language
formal language based on a conceptual formalism for the purpose of representing conceptual schemas
[EN ISO 19101:2005]
EXAMPLE UML, EXPRESS, IDEF1X.
NOTE A conceptual schema language may be lexical or graphical. Several conceptual schema languages can be
based on the same conceptual formalism.
4.5
conformance
fulfilment of specified requirements
[EN ISO 19113:2005]
4.6
component
physical, replaceable part of a system that packages implementation and provides the realization of a set of
interfaces
[ISO/TS 19103:2005]
4.7
identifier
linguistically independent sequence of characters capable of uniquely and permanently identifying that with
which it is associated
[ISO/IEC 11179-3:2003]
4.8
interoperability
capability to communicate, execute programs, or transfer data among various functional units in a manner that
requires the user to have little or no knowledge of the unique characteristics of those units
[ISO/IEC 2382-1:1993]
4.9
reference frame
aggregation of the data needed by different components of an information system
4.10
resource
asset or means that fulfils a requirement
[EN ISO 19115:2005]
4.11
Spatial Data Infrastructure
SDI
metadata, spatial data sets and spatial data services; network services and technologies; agreements on
sharing, access and use; coordination and monitoring mechanisms, processes and procedures, established,
operated or made available in an interoperable manner
[INSPIRE]
NOTE In the context of this report the term SDI is restricted to a platform- and implementation-neutral technological
infrastructure for geospatial data and services, based upon standards and specifications.
4.12
Use Case
specification of a sequence of actions, including variants, that a system (or other entity) can perform,
interacting with actors of the system
[ISO/IEC 19501:2005]
5 Abbreviated terms
API application programming interface
CLA cultural and linguistic adaptability
CORBA Common Object Request Broker Architecture
DCE Distributed Computing Environment
DRM digital rights management
ebXML Electronic business using eXtensible Markup Language
EOSE Extended Open System Environment
EN European Standard (CEN deliverable)
ESDI European Spatial Data Infrastructure
INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe
GI geographic information
GIRM Geospatial Interoperability Reference Model
GML Geography Markup Language
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ICT information and communications technology
IT information technology
NSDI National Spatial Data Infrastructure
OASIS Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards
OCL Object Constraint Language
ODP Open Distributed Processing
OGC Open Geospatial Consortium
OLE/COM Object linking and embedding/ Component Object Model
OMG Object Management Group
ORM OpenGIS Reference Model
RM-ODP Reference Model of Open Distributed Processing
SDI Spatial Data Infrastructure
SLD Styled Layer Descriptor
SOA Service Oriented Architecture
SOAP Simple Object Access Protocol
1)
SKOS Simple Knowledge Organisation Systems
UDDI Universal Description, Discovery and Integration
UML Unified Modelling Language
UUID Universally Unique Identifier
WCS Web Coverage Service interface specification
WFS Web Feature Service interface specification
WMS Web Map Service interface specification
WRS Web Registry Server
WSA Web Service Architecture
WSDL Web Service Description Language
W3C World Wide Web Consortium
XMI eXtensible Markup Interface
XML eXtensible Markup Language
XSL eXtensible Stylesheet Language
6 SDI interoperability
6.1 Introduction
A Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) relies on standards and specifications in the field of geographic information
and information technology. This chapter systematically identifies standards that are of particular relevance to
SDI development and implementation. A necessary condition for the successful establishment of a SDI is that
the software industry supports relevant standards in commercial products. At the same time, public authorities
are to request the support of standards in public procurement processes.
6.2 Standards and interoperability
Standards should make interoperability as easy, simple and reliable as possible. The (EN) ISO 19100 series
of standards both individually and collectively are quite complex. The risk of different interpretations of the
same standard in different implementations exists and has to be minimised as much as possible. The aim
must be to establish implementations of the standards which are as unambiguous and precise as possible.
Avoiding variations of interpretation can be achieved through the use of suitable, standard based tools for data
modelling, interface description, data transfer and quality control.
Currently, EN ISO 19136 (GML) and CEN ISO/TS 19139 (metadata XML schema implementation) postulate
different encodings. Different encodings are an obstacle to interoperability, because they increase complexity
end therefore increase error susceptibility and costs. All (EN) ISO 19100 series encoding rules should be
harmonised and concentrated in EN ISO 19118 (encoding). The relationship between these standards is
indicated in Figure 1.
1) See http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/.
Figure 1  (EN) ISO 19100 and GML application schema (from EN ISO 19136:2009)
Costs of implementation and operation are also an important consideration. Whilst it is possible to establish
individual interfaces for or between any systems or databases, the advantage of using standards should be to
provide an easier and cheaper implementation. Interoperability gets more difficult for more complex systems,
databases and interfaces. Therefore it is important to keep it as simple as possible at least at the level of
system and user interfaces.
Quality issues are also an important consideration. Completeness and consistency of content, e.g. structure,
and format of transfer data should be automatically checkable versus reference and target data model. Once
more tools based on standards are the solution of choice.
The full impact of standards on interoperability is reached when everything in the whole process from the
description of involved data models to the description on exchange format and quality control can be
described and derived unambiguously with a set of standard based tools following the model driven approach.
This process should be possible without any complex manual working steps to support a straightforward and
conformant maintenance of the different system components.
There are several interoperability checkpoints:
• Use the model driven approach based on standards;
• Keep it precise;
• Keep it simple;
• Use standards based tools;
• Automate the processes;
• Check the quality.
The users of a SDI are considered to be those individuals or organisations that, in the context of their
business processes, need to share and access geo-resources in a meaningful and sustainable way. Based on
platform- and vendor-neutral standards and specifications, a SDI aims at assisting organisations and
individuals in publishing, finding, delivering, and eventually, using geographic information and services over
the internet across borders of information communities in a more cost-effective manner.
A SDI relies on standards and specifications, many of which are already available. There is, however, a need
to systematically identify these standards and to determine whether or not they are sufficiently precise and
unambiguous so that their implementation provides interoperability and fulfils requirements of a SDI in Europe.
Interoperability is the capability to communicate, execute programs, or transfer data among various functional
units in a manner that requires the user to have little or no knowledge of the unique characteristics of those
units. Standardization of geographic information can best be served by a set of standards that integrates a
detailed description of geographic information concepts with the concepts of information technology. A goal of
the GI standardization efforts is the facilitation of interoperability of geographic information systems, including
interoperability in distributed computing environments. Interoperability provides the freedom to mix and match
information system components without compromising overall success (OGC, 2003). It is the basis for the
successful implementation of a SDI in Europe, and will allow:
a) finding information and processing tools, when they are needed, independent of physical location;
b) understanding and use of the discovered information and tools, no matter what platform supports them;
whether local or remote;
c) easier and more cost-effective integration and combination of data originating from heterogeneous
sources;
d) support of policies in Europe;
e) control of the evolution of a SDI.
It is anticipated that the current lack of interoperability will be resolved by the support and implementation of
international standards by software providers. This will greatly increase the efficiency of the use of geographic
information in the future.
6.3 Generic architecture model
Recent EU initiatives have brought ‘Interoperability’ to centre-stage of the European Union’s ICT governance
framework.
A range of stakeholders (governments, industry, consumers, and other social partners) have recognised the
need for interoperability and recognise the benefits interoperability could bring. Interoperability has
supplemented earlier discussions focused exclusively on open group standards, different software licensing
models, or technical specifications under public procurement laws. Interoperability embraces the wider policy
perspective to enhance ICT-embedded industries and the information society at large, including the
geographic information communities.
It is vital that the generic architecture model for geographic information and services aligns with the general
2)
requirements for European e-Government Services, as stated in the European Interoperability Strategy (EIF) .
This framework identifies the organisational, semantic and technical interoperability aspects.
Interoperable Delivery of European eGovernment Services to public administrations, businesses and citizens
(DABC) uses the opportunities offered by information and communication technologies to encourage and
support the delivery of cross-border public sector services to citizens and enterprises in Europe, to improve
efficiency and collaboration between European public administrations and to contribute to making Europe an
attractive place to live, work and invest.
An Interoperability Framework can be defined as the set of policies, standards and guidelines that describes
the way in which organisations have agreed, or should agree, to do business with each other. Consequently,
an Interoperability Frameworks architecture model is not a static document and needs to be maintained over
time as technologies, standards and administrative requirements change.

2) See http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/.
Figure 2 shows the principles for interoperability in the context of EIF. However, the generic framework and
architecture model here focuses on the underlying technologies and standards that enable these services to
be created, and does not cover all aspects of EIF, like the organisational interoperability issues.
The underlying principles of this interoperability framework focus on the following principles:
• accessibility – non-discriminating, open and publicly available data, including guidelines for WAI (Web
Access Initiative) from the World Wide Web Consortium;
• multilingu
...