Labels expressed in the metadata language
Closed this issue · 1 comments
The Requirements C and D for <gmd:protocol> element and for <gmd:applicationProfile> element recommend to use the codelist labels expressed in the metadata language.
As in case of <gmd:protocol> element the labels are acronyms in most cases (i.e. wms, csw, wfs, ...) the recommendation above doesn't make sense.
In case of <gmd:applicationProfile> element, the Regulation 1205/2008 in Part D3 also provides the language-neutral values for the Spatial Data Service types. Consequently the Requirements should allow for the use of either language-neutral values or the labels expressed in the metadata language.
The reason why the recommendation has been made to include the labels in the metadata language is to facilitate the different spellings of the protocols (OGC:WMS, WMS, ...) that are now common in the Member States. It is therefore not exactly the language, but of the usual spelling of the abbreviations in a Member State. OGC also leaves room for that, they only give a preference for the label to be used. The Anchor with the URI is machine readable, and this should exactly contain a common agreed value. The label is human readable, and should fulfill that role.