[OSGeodata] IRC meeting coments

[Frank Warmerdam]

Ned Horning wrote:
> For metadata I don't see much value in creating a new standard. One
> advantage of using FGDC or a subset of it is that most of the data that is
> freely distributed probably already has FGDC format metadata associated with
> it. What ever is decided for a metadata format it should at least be
> compatible with an existing system so it's easy to map fields between
> systems. I'm not sure if FGDC will be a barrier to new contributions. Do we
> expect to be generating large amounts of new metadata?  

Folks,

I would agree with Ned that FGDC metadata is the dominant standard in
place, and not terribly complicated.  If we want to define what we require
for metadata, I would suggest it be in terms of the minimum set of FGDC
fields we would require.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGF, http://osgeo.org