<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p> This study is aimed at exposing differences between two data models in case of code lists values provided there. The first of them is an obligatory one for managing Geodesic Register of Utility Networks databases in Poland [9] and the second is the model originating from the Technical Guidelines issued to the INSPIRE Directive. Since the second one mentioned is the basis for managing spatial databases among European parties, correlating these two data models has an effect in easing the way of harmonizing and, in consequence, exchanging spatial data. Therefore, the study presents the possibilities of increasing compatibility between the values of the code lists concerning attributes for objects provided in both models. In practice, it could lead to an increase of the competitiveness of entities managing or processing such databases and to greater involvement in scientific or research projects when it comes to the mining industry. Moreover, since utility networks located on mining areas are under particular protection, the ability of making them more fitted to their own needs will make it possible for mining plants to exchange spatial data in a more efficient way.</p></abstract>

This study is aimed at exposing differences between two data models in case of code lists values provided there. The first of them is an obligatory one for managing Geodesic Register of Utility Networks databases in Poland [9] and the second is the model originating from the Technical Guidelines issued to the INSPIRE Directive. Since the second one mentioned is the basis for managing spatial databases among European parties, correlating these two data models has an effect in easing the way of harmonizing and, in consequence, exchanging spatial data. Therefore, the study presents the possibilities of increasing compatibility between the values of the code lists concerning attributes for objects provided in both models. In practice, it could lead to an increase of the competitiveness of entities managing or processing such databases and to greater involvement in scientific or research projects when it comes to the mining industry. Moreover, since utility networks located on mining areas are under particular protection, the ability of making them more fitted to their own needs will make it possible for mining plants to exchange spatial data in a more efficient way.

The Unification of the Code Lists Provided within the Data Model Originating from the Inspire Technical Guidelines and the Ones Provided for Gesut Databases in the Context of Potential Exploitation in the Mining Industry

Management Systems in Production Engineering

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

This study is aimed at exposing differences between two data models in case of code lists values provided there. The first of them is an obligatory one for...

The Unification of the Code Lists Provided within the Data Model Originating from the Inspire Technical Guidelines and the Ones Provided for Gesut Databases in the Context of Potential Exploitation in the Mining Industry

Published Online: Mar 15, 2018

Page range: 178 - 182

Received: Mar 01, 2016

Accepted: Jun 01, 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/mspe-06-03-2016

Keywords
GESUT, INSPIRE, database, interoperability, data harmonization

© 2018

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

The Unification of the Code Lists Provided within the Data Model Originating from the Inspire Technical Guidelines and the Ones Provided for Gesut Databases in the Context of Potential Exploitation in the Mining Industry

Published Online: Mar 15, 2018

Page range: 178 - 182

Received: Mar 01, 2016

Accepted: Jun 01, 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/mspe-06-03-2016

KeywordsGESUT, INSPIRE, database, interoperability, data harmonization

© 2018

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Keywords
GESUT, INSPIRE, database, interoperability, data harmonization