Versions Compared

Old Version 7

changes.mady.by.user Jan Musial

Saved on

compared with

New Version 8

changes.mady.by.user Jan Musial

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Id.AuthorSection/Page numberTitleComment
1JMSTAC-CORE-GEN-REC-0020Use of mixed case in e.g. platform valuesMis-alignment with the "searchable identifiers" recommendations here: https://github.com/radiantearth/stac-spec/blob/master/best-practices.md. Perhaps the recommendation should be that the naming follows GCMD but best practice for the case sensitivity is that of STAC.  (Open for discussion)
2Mario Winkler (DLR)STAC-CORE-COL-REC-0110Collection IdentifierThe specific collection names for each EOF Service should be defined in the corresponding EOF Service ICDs since the set of collections is known in advance.
3Mario Winkler (DLR)

STAC-CORE-COL-REC-0120

STAC-CORE-ITEM-REQ-0180

STAC-CORE-ITEM-REC-0190

Semantics of "created" and "published"The semantics of the "created" and "published" properties may differ between the EOF services. This should be reflected in the individual EOF Service ICDs.
4Mario Winkler (DLR)STAC-CORE-ITEM-REC-0190Additional timestamp informationThere is a difference between data not being valid and not being available any more. Maybe differentiate this by also using the "unpublished" property from the Timestamps extension.
5Mario Winkler (DLR)STAC-API-ADVSRCH-CREQ-0630Set of fields returned by defaultThe default fields may differ between the various EOF Services and should be defined in the service-level ICDs.
6Mario Winkler (DLR)

STAC-API-ADVSRCH-CREQ-0640

STAC-API-ADVSRCH-CREQ-0650

Empty or no "fields" directiveMaybe consider to allow an EOF Service to tailor this behavior e.g. to optimize query performance.
7Matthias Mohrvarious
  • A link for the file info extension is missing
  • STAC-...-0020: All values should be lowercase as per STAC spec recommendation
  • STAC-...-0060: "role": "metadata" is invalid STAC
  • STAC-...-0130: Two options are given but not detailed enough to decide which to use when.
  • STAC-...-0160: It's unclear why start and end_datetime need to be provided as duplicate values.
  • STAC-...-0290/0300/0310: This seems a bit ambiguous and confusing. Maybe linking to the newly added best practice (in STAC 1.1) around thumbnails and overviews may help.
  • STAC-...-0340/0350: "role"="data" is invalid STAC
  • STAC-...-0370: The extension is not stable at all and is likely to change drastically, a requirement seems not be a good idea at this point.
  • STAC-...-0440: A secret is not required in a web-browser based OIDC flow (not sure whether that's a usecase).
  • If the OGC API - Features conformance classes get implemented, you can't exclude the conformance and service-desc relation types
  • STAC-...-0590: The selection of JSON Schema properties is a little random?!
8

Jan Musial

(CloudFerro)

page 4outdated STAC version STAC has been already released in version 1.1 beta (official release planned next week) so it would be beneficial to start with the most recent version inted instead of creating a technological backlog from the very beginning. Furthermore, the CDSE is implemented in v1.1. so PIRP in v 1.0 would not  compatible.

The extensions versions should also match the ones used in the CDSE.
9



10



11



12



13








...