Page Comparison

Completeness

Notes:

1. The information definition can be a standalone document or embedded into another document such as a service description.
2. The information definition can be made up of a set of documents. 
3. The scope statement contained in the information definition helps to answer this check.

Correctness

[  ] The information definition is written in English.
[  ] The information definition uses the primary British spelling when conflicting spellings of a word exist.

Completeness

[  ] The information definition has a title.

[  ] The information definition has an edition.

[  ] The information definition has a reference date.

Completeness

[  ] The information definition contains the name of the responsible person or organisation.

[  ] The information definition contains contact information for the responsible party.

[  ] The information definition contains the role played by the responsible party.

Completeness

[  ] The information definition contains a textual description of the scope of the information covered by the information definition.

[  ] The scope clearly delineates what is covered by the information definition.

Completeness

[  ] The information definition declares a dedicated namespace for its concepts.

Completeness

[  ] The information definition contains a name for each of its information concepts and data concepts. 

[  ] The information definition contains a definition for each of its information concepts and data concepts.

[  ] The information definition contains a data type for each of its data concepts.

Consistency

[  ] There are no duplicated concepts in the same namespace within the information definition.

[  ] The concepts within the information definition are consistent with each other i.e. that concepts do not contradict each other.

[  ] The concepts within the information definition are consistent with their reference material.

Notes:

1. Reference material includes e.g. any ISO standards used in the information definition.

Correctness

[  ] Each concept's name, definition and data type are correct i.e. that they actually represent what they should.

Completeness

either:

[  ] Each concept has a unique identifier in accordance with IETF RFC 3986.

or

[  ] Each concept can be uniquely identified through some other mechanism e.g. by being uniquely named in a namespace.

Consistency

[  ] The information definition uses definitions that are consistent with the AIRM when the concept's name is the same as that in the AIRM.

Correctness

[  ] The information definition has applied the principles for definitions for each of its concepts.

Consistency

[  ] The definitions of the metadata fields in the information definition are consistent (not contradictory) with the AIRM's metadata standard (ISO 19115:2003 - Geographic information — Metadata).

Consistency

[  ] The information definition’s basic data types do not conflict with those in the AIRM.

Completeness

[  ] The information definition has a semantic correspondence statement for each concept.

Completeness

[  ] Each semantic correspondence statement contains one of the four options allowed by the specification.

Completeness

[  ] Each semantic correspondence declaring that a concept in an information definition is out-of-scope of the AIRM has a rationale.

[  ] Each semantic correspondence declaring that no semantic correspondence has been established has a rationale.

Correctness

[  ] Each trace from the information concept in the information definition is to the AIRM concept that has an equivalent or wider meaning.

Correctness

[  ] Each trace from the data type in the information definition is to the AIRM data type that has an equivalent or wider meaning.

Correctness

[  ] Each additional trace to fully describe the narrowing of the concept being mapped is to the correct AIRM concept.

Correctness