Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

View Full Metadata Link omits many elements #4597

Closed
torrin47 opened this issue Jan 30, 2024 · 6 comments
Closed

View Full Metadata Link omits many elements #4597

torrin47 opened this issue Jan 30, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Software defect or bug support Issues from agency requests or affecting users

Comments

@torrin47
Copy link

On data.gov details pages corresponding to ISO 19139 records, a link is displayed to "View Full Metadata", which loads a version of the metadata presented as a static HTML page - presumably run through a stylesheet.

image

Our data stewards have been taking issue with the characterization of what displays at this link as being "Full". It may be many things, but it is emphatically not full, complete, comprehensive, or in any way representative of all of the metadata content. We're honestly not sure how it might more accurately be characterized - ugly and confusing seems to be the consensus.

We see three possible solutions:

  1. Overhaul the stylesheet used to generate the HTML page so that it truly approaches the "Full" metadata record, and presents it in a layout that is organized and logical
  2. Rename the link to something that more accurately describe what is displayed
  3. Remove the link until option 1 can be achieved

How to reproduce

  1. Click link to "view full metadata".
  2. Recoil in confusion at the result

Expected behavior

We've searched for an example of a better display of full ISO 19139 metadata, and honestly, none of them are great, but most are better than what's currently displayed here. Here's an example of Esri's HTML:
https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/3700342d3d184b0d92eae99a78d9c7a3/info/metadata/metadata.xml?format=default&output=html
and here's a version from GeoNetwork that's a lot fancier but still manages to be confusing to novices:
https://sdi.eea.europa.eu/catalogue/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/ff63d80d-a1e8-414b-9a42-6b35d54fff30/formatters/xsl-view?root=div&view=advanced
In a perfect world, the page would more closely resemble something like this:
image

Actual behavior

This is an example of what we see at data.gov:
https://catalog.data.gov/harvest/object/dcd876c5-1ed6-4a2b-9666-b4d87ca21806/html

@jbrown-xentity
Copy link
Contributor

I do see this as not working correctly. Some dataset pages it works with limitations, many just display nothing.
As we are not CSDGM or ISO metadata experts, we probably shouldn't have these views in the first place. I have removed the links, as it seemed the most prudent thing to do. See PR here.
If you are interested in building a template for what this should look like, please let us know. It looks like the logic for those views is a third party CKAN extension detailed here, something we work with but do not support or maintain directly.

@jbrown-xentity jbrown-xentity added the support Issues from agency requests or affecting users label Jan 31, 2024
@torrin47
Copy link
Author

Thanks, removing the links does seem like a fine near-term solution.

Odd that many if not most of the stylesheets I'm finding date to 2011, including the CKAN extension:
https://github.com/ckan/ckanext-spatial/blob/master/ckanext/spatial/templates/ckanext/spatial/gemini2-html-stylesheet.xsl
qGIS:
https://github.com/nextgis/qgis_metatools/blob/master/xsl/iso19115.xsl
NOAA:
https://metadata-standards.data.bas.ac.uk/static/xml-stylesheets/iso-html/xml-to-html-ISO.xsl
It seems as if enthusiasm for ISO dropped off after that point - likely because of the work to adopt 19115-1/19115-3, but -3 has been available since 2016, and we're still waiting for tools and implementation examples. Perhaps folks are just fried on XML and are now waiting for 19115-4 so we can all work in JSON? https://www.iso.org/standard/86968.html
I think we'd be interested in collaborating on a template, but aren't in a position to go it alone and would want to be sure we're aligned with the rest of the community. Perhaps we'll work through the FGDC for coordination. Thanks again!

@gujral-rei gujral-rei moved this to 🗄 Closed in data.gov team board Feb 1, 2024
@jbrown-xentity jbrown-xentity moved this from 🗄 Closed to ✔ Done in data.gov team board Feb 2, 2024
@jbrown-xentity
Copy link
Contributor

We have this merged in, you can see an example at https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/u-s-hourly-precipitation-data2, where the only option is to download the metadata, not "view" it.
Thanks!

@torrin47
Copy link
Author

torrin47 commented Feb 2, 2024

That seems fine to me - the raw xml metadata still has value, wouldn't want to remove that. But now we're also seeing the GeoPlatform links show up on many of these pages, including the example you cited, though the links always end in dead ends:

image

image

are these updates related? On your radar? Thanks again for the quick response.

@btylerburton btylerburton moved this from ✔ Done to 🗄 Closed in data.gov team board Feb 5, 2024
@jbrown-xentity
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, that is an outstanding issue. Geoplatform recently redid all their backend services (https://kb.geoplatform.gov/gp-info/geoplatform-gov-release-notes.html#november-2023-version-1-62-0), and the API we reference is not working correctly at the moment. I've been told fixes are currently in work for this API on the Geoplatform side.
cc'ing @chris-macdermaid @borisacha from Geoplatform for updates when a fix for this API is in place...
Thanks @torrin47

@chris-macdermaid
Copy link
Contributor

A fix for this will be added to production with GeoPlatform's next release.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Software defect or bug support Issues from agency requests or affecting users
Projects
Archived in project
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants