...
| Title | Change Proposal | Justification | Status | Notes | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Update definition | Update Definitions page to include the different types of data sets. This can be a note in the ICAO data set entry.
| The obstacle data set has different requirements from the others so needs to be defined on its own. | Open | The different metadata requirements can be found at Basic properties for obstacles. | |||||||||||||
| 2 | Change wording of DS-META-007 - Geographical extent of the data set on Metadata Requirements | Reword the requirement into two clauses:
The new wording will be reflected on Requirement 7_ Geographical extent of the data set. | The | tables on that page will be updated. In particular the Obligation / Condition row should become: obstacle data set makes "Area of coverage" mandatory. The tidy up of the table will ensure it is inline with the requirement/recommendation. | Open | |||||||||||||
| 3 | Change the list of geographical elements to include. | The introduction on Requirement 7_ Geographical extent of the data set should become:
The Obligation / Condition row in tables should become:
| the following is required
| ; and
The obstacle data set makes "Area of coverage" mandatory. | The tidy up of the table will ensure it is inline with the requirement/recommendationReflects decision to concentrate on the provision of GeographicalDescription but allow the provision of other elements if available. | Open | ||||||||||||
| 34 | New requirement for obstacle data sets covering integrity. | Add definition to Definitions:
Add new requirement to Minimal Metadata Requirements:
Add dedicated page with guidance.
Update Appendix B_ Complete Informative Example to reflect the guidance. | See Basic properties for obstacles. | Open | Are the levels:
What figure is expected in the metadata e.g.
See work are notes below for examples... | 4. Decision was to use lineage and the levels (critical, essential, routine) to fulfill the requirement. Obstacle data is routine so that is used in the guidance. | ||||||||||||
| 5 | Rename Requirement 7_ Geographical extent of the data set, etc. | The page name should be updated to e.g. DS-META-007 - Geographical extent of the data set. This change should be applied to all the individual requirements pages. | The word "requirement" can be misleading. It is better simply to use the identifier. | Open | ||||||||||||||
| 56 | Update Appendix A_ Requirements Analysis to reflect final version of Annex 15 and PANS-AIM | Check the paragraph numbers used. Add the obstacle data set metadata requirements. Updated numbers should be reflected on Minimal Metadata Requirements as well. | Mostly tidy up. | Open | ||||||||||||||
| 67 | Update trace for Requirement 7_ Geographical extent of the data set on the Metadata Requirements page. | The requirement is traceable to PANS-AIM Table A6-2. Obstacle attributes for the obstacle data sets | The obstacle data set makes "Area of coverage" mandatory. | Open | ||||||||||||||
| 78 | Update guidance on | Update guidance to clarify what is meant by validity in this case. See comments on the page... | Open |
...
...
Notes on data integrity discussions
The group considered various inputs for the data integrity discussion.
ED-98C/DO-276C:
- Integrity
Definition: Integrity of data is the degree of assurance that the data and its value have not been lost nor altered since the data origination or authorized amendment.
Data Capture Rule: The integrity of the data set shall be expressed, indicating the probability of any single data element having been changed inadvertently since the creation of the data set [OBST-R034].
NOTE: For more information on integrity, refer to EUROCAE ED-76A / RTCA DO-200B.
ED-119C/DO-291C:
- Integrity of data in the aeronautical data processing chain from data origination process to present data manipulation process.
- Encoding: expressed in terms of probability of data loss or alteration (0=perfect, 1=all lost).
- Example: essential ICAO Annex 15 0.0001=10e-5.
Also: AMDB section of ED-119C/DO-291C mentions integrity as an extension to ISO 19115. Do we want to do that? It uses ISO's extension mechanism.It has the following example: <amdb:dataIntegrity>0.00000001</amdb:dataIntegrity>
Discussions
The group decided not to use ISO's extension mechanism.
The group point out that ICAO is moving away from the use of numerical values for integrity, instead taking a procedural approach to ensuring integrity.
It was therefore decided to use the Lineage option.