<div>Jo, all,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thank you, Jo, for organising this IRC meeting. I'll not be able to attend but I have added more thoughts to my Wiki pages at</div>
<div><a href="http://www.geometa.info/rappiinfo/wiki/index.php/OSGeodata">http://www.geometa.info/rappiinfo/wiki/index.php/OSGeodata</a>, and moved the OAI-PMH vs. WFS comparison to <a href="http://www.geometa.info/rappiinfo/wiki/index.php/OAI-PMH">
http://www.geometa.info/rappiinfo/wiki/index.php/OAI-PMH</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>I think that two crucial questions are crucial:</div>
<div>i) Do we need a search protocol or a harvesting protocol?</div>
<div>ii) How to describe data access services as well as filter services? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>To me it becomes more and clear that harvesting could be an answer to i) (no live queries through this protocol). </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Regarding ii) I would put the geographic data/resources in the focus being pointed to by a metadata entity. There we have to define enumeration values for data access services (like file api, jdbc, http get, wms, wfs) being a specialized dc-element 'type'. On the other hand we need to model filter services/resources as other metadata entities on their own (
e.g. format conversion service or coord transformation service).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>-- Stefan</div>