The representation of the spatialResolution should be clearer specified and explained

[uvoges]

For the spatial Resolution , I have seen different diverging representations:
e.g:

   <dcat:spatialResolutionInMeters rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal">0.5</dcat:spatialResolutionInMeters>

or:

    <dqv:hasQualityMeasurement>
      <dqv:QualityMeasurement>
        <dqv:isMeasurementOf rdf:resource="http://data.europa.eu/930/spatialResolutionAsDistance"/>
        <dqv:value rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal">0.5</dqv:value>
        <ns0:unitMeasure rdf:resource="http://www.qudt.org/vocab/unit/M"/>
      </dqv:QualityMeasurement>
    </dqv:hasQualityMeasurement>

or:

    <dqv:hasQualityMeasurement>
      <dqv:QualityMeasurement>
        <dqv:isMeasurementOf rdf:resource="http://data.europa.eu/930/spatialResolutionAsScale"/>
        <dqv:value rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal">0.002</dqv:value>
      </dqv:QualityMeasurement>
    </dqv:hasQualityMeasurement>

[jakubklimek]

These options are described in B.6.13 Spatial resolution – Spatial resolution of the dataset. What is your suggestion here?

[uvoges]

I would propose o use the same semantic (model) as in ISO19115- see MD_Resolution
also the Spatial resolution as vertical distance should be defined, seeISO19115: extent /vertical Extent….

[jakubklimek]

@uvoges What specifically do you see as different/problematic?

Regarding the vertical distance, please open a separate issue for this, so that it can be addressed specifically. This is probably one of the places where the mapping is incomplete and no one requested this to be present in GeoDCAT-AP yet.

[uvoges]

ther is a discussion on this in DCAT-AP: https://github.com/SEMICeu/GeoDCAT-AP/issues/15

[uvoges]

alight-weight solution similar to(in addition to spatial resolution in meters)
equivalentScale:
.. MD_RepresentativeFraction
.. denominator: 50000