Post a comment on the text below

Previous comments

• SE - Sweden (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 02 May 2019 11:22:24

  relatedToIdentifier (reported in only 0.7% of the sites)	SE: Yes. We are of the opinion that the information is necessary
  purpose (duplicate with relation to the descriptive data in the XML)	SE: No. We are of the opinion that the information is not necessary
  catchmentArea (only 33% of the sites on rivers )	SE: It is not necessary for WFD reporting (but for SoE reporting is it a requirement)
  maximumDepth (only 22% of the sites)	SE: It is not necessary for WFD reporting (but for SoE reporting is it a requirement)

• NO - Norway (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 10:10:41

  • relatedToIdentifier should be kept
  • purpose should be dropped, since it is a duplicate
  • catchmentArea should be kept
  • maximumDepth could be dropped
• PL - Poland1 (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 14:43:49

  Spatial Data Schemas.

  Spatial data schemas should be simplified. Approach depicted in slide 6 and 8 is far more optimal than the current one. Using the nomenclature from INSPIRE schemas would make it a lot easier to map data sets in ETL tools for INSIRE. WaterBodies, RBD’s, SU’s should have AM theme elements as its core. MonitoringStations should have EF theme elements as its core.

• IT - Italy (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 16:01:36

  • relatedToIdentifier: can be dropped
    
  • purpose: duplicate with relation to the descriptive data in the XML - can be dropped
    
  • catchmentArea: can be dropped
    
  • maximum depth: can be dropped
    
• PT - Portugal (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 18:08:53

  • purpose
    duplicate with relation to the descriptive data in the XML

  We are of the opinion that the information is not necessary, because this is in XML.

  • catchmentArea 
    only 33% of the sites on rivers 

  We are of the opinion that the information is not necessary.

  • maximumDepth 
    only 22% of the sites

  We are of the opinion that the information is not necessary.

• SI - Slovenia (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 21:53:21

  Regarding the question "Should this information be reported in 2022?":

  1. We do not agree with deletion of GML data elements "relatedToIdentifier" and ""relatedToIdentifierscheme". This GML data elements are important for Slovenia because of our widely spread karstic characteristics of the land (for example, a monitoring site for monitoring the quality of ground water bodies can be spatially located on the adjacent water body due to flow characteristic in the karstic area. In these cases, the data element "relatedToIdentifier" gives an important information on the interconnection of the monitoring site and ground water body)
  2. We do not oppose the deletion of GML data elements "purpose, catchmentArea, maximumDepth"
  3. In case that the element "catchmentArea" would not be not deleted (still a subject of next reporting) we suggest that "catchment area" refers to surface water bodies and not to monitoring sites.