Back to section

Post a comment on the text below

Class: QualityElement(child of SurfaceWaterBody)

  1. Please include here any comments which apply to all the schema elements in this Class.
  2. In addition to those general schema element level comments, we welcome your views on: a) whether you think this Class can be simplified;  and b) whether you think the linkages with other reporting Classes or Schemas can be improved, and how;

Previous comments

  • RO - Romania1 (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 18 Mar 2019 08:07:04

    In order to simplify the reporting, we suggest to:

    1. eliminate the table QualityElement_qeGrouping and to include this information as a schema element in the table Quality Element and
    2. to apply/create a conditionality, respectively QualityElement_qeGrouping be reported only if in the schema element qeMonitoringResults, the “grouping” is selected/used from the enumeration list.

    Also we suggest that the structure of this table be similar to the one from the WISE – 1stRBMPlan (SWEco_StatusorPotential) where the information was presented in the column and not in the rows in order to be easier for visualing and tracking.

  • ES - Spain (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 20 Mar 2019 18:01:09

    GENERAL COMMENT

    In order to better understand and use the database, the quality or optimization of the database design must be sacrificed a little, giving more weight to its logical understanding.

    The concepts of the WFD: Ecological status SW, Chemical status SW, Quantitative status GW, Chemical status GW should have a similar treatment in the database.

    In this case the class QualityElement for SW EcoStatus should be equivalent to SWPrioritySubstance for SW ChemStatus. 

    In the case of GW the equivalent classes should be GWPollutant for GW chemical status and an equivalent class for GW quantitative status that doen't exist as the information related to quantitative satatus is directly stored in the class GroundWaterBody.

    The design is not incorrect but really difficult to be undestood.

  • BG - Bulgaria (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 21 Mar 2019 16:28:47

    It is required to “select in turn each of the quality elements”; not only the relevant QE at SWB level.

    We suggest to simplify this Class -  only the QEs, relevant for the SWB-type, to be reported ( to avoid the reporting of “not applicable” QEs -  for BG Danube RBD these records form 31,5% out of all 4864 records).

  • IT - Italy (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 27 Mar 2019 12:22:48

    Surface water bodies classified by grouping should not be included in this Class that should be compiled only for monitored quality element. The status derived by grouping should be assigned to the surfacewaterbody and not to each QE.

  • NO - Norway (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 14:33:06

    We can keep it as it is, since we just pull the data from the database, though we get many rows - 536598 in all

You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.