OGC API - Records Provider - Local or Web Accessible Folder of metadata XML

[KoalaGeo]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. Similar to pyCSW it'd be nice to be able to load XML metadata records to serve OA-Records

Describe the solution you'd like In the config be able to point pygeoapi at a local folder or web accessible folder (https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/xml/products/)

Describe alternatives you've considered Deploy pyCSW separately

Additional context Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

[tomkralidis]

cc @kalxas @pvgenuchten @francbartoli

@KoalaGeo thanks for the info. Sounds like we are looking for an OARec record loader of sorts that will write metadata (XML) to a given backend. Given the complexity of various metadata XML representations and management workflow, I'm not sure we should have this capability in pygeoapi proper.

pygeoapi's current OARec design (like other provider types in the project) is that the metadata backend already exists and is ready for binding. We have some rudimentary utilities to load ISO metadata into TinyDB databases, but this is scoped to bootstrapping test environments.

So, while we are here: Q: "What's the difference between pycsw and pygeoapi" (coming to an FAQ soon) A: pycsw has deeper metadata content support (administration/management/transactions and format translation). pygeoapi assumes your backend is already in place

Having said this, I think there is a great opportunity for developing a pycsw record backend for pygeoapi. In this way, one can use pycsw to manage the repo and pygeoapi to simply serve it out (note that pycsw also supports OARec).

Another option is to build something out in @pvgenuchten's up and coming PyGeoDataCrawler, but I will let Paul speak to feasibility/options.

Looking forward to folks' comments here.

[github-actions[bot]]

As per RFC4, this Issue has been inactive for 90 days. In order to manage maintenance burden, it will be automatically closed in 7 days.

[github-actions[bot]]

As per RFC4, this Issue has been closed due to there being no activity for more than 90 days.