GE The is often used Review and change Purpose and Test “Purpose” metadata inconsistently. method for all tests. shall be a summary description of For some of the tests this has already been “Purpose” what is checked, not a description of the done below. element, e.g. A.02.title Purpose: The by which the cited resource is known Should read instead: Purpose: that a resource title is specified. GE There are Open questions metadata There is no explicit Implementation Requirement in TG MD for the following tests: A.02.title A.03.abstract A.24.responsible.party.role A.28.md.creation.date Should these be excluded or included in the ATS? Or added as requirements in the TG MD? GE It is not clear whether this ATS aims at metadata checking whether in a document: -the minimum set of required documents is present -some of the elements are specified incorrectly with respect to the INSPIRE requirements. This aspect is crucial to determine if a test succeeds or GE English level is quite low Review all English text metadata
GE The “Purpose” is often used inconsistently. “Purpose” shall be a summary description of what is checked, not a description of the metadata element, e.g. A.02.title Purpose: The by which the cited resource is known Should read instead: Purpose: that a resource title is specified. Review and change Purpose and Test method for all tests. For some of the tests this has already been done below. GE There are Open questions There is no explicit Implementation Requirement in TG MD for the following tests: A.02.title A.03.abstract A.24.responsible.party.role A.28.md.creation.date Should these be excluded or included in the ATS? Or added as requirements in the TG MD? GE It is not clear whether this ATS aims at checking whether in a metadata document: -the minimum set of required documents is present -some of the elements are specified incorrectly with respect to the INSPIRE requirements. This aspect is crucial to determine if a test succeeds or GE English level is quite low Review all English text metadata metadata