Content Comparison

...

These comments pick out a few places where minor changes might be beneficial.

Keys and IDs

The model follows E-R conventions, where both Primary- and Foreign-keys are given a name AaaBbbID.

...

AaaBbbID should be reserved for the assigned identifier, else it is confusing.

Site

swPoint - this is an unusual anchor point, it is more common to specify centroid. But OK.

Feature

• (latitude, longitude, elevation) - Consider linking to a (3D?) Point instead - i.e. maintain a separate Point table

• what is the distinction between elevation vs altitude? and depth? They are all vertical coordinates. (Is depth measured positive down?)

Observation

Some attribute names are inconsistent with O&M/SOSA

• parameter instead of sosa:observedProperty

• method instead of sosa:usedProcedure

• instrumentType + observer instead of sosa:madeBySensor

Sampling

• sampleFeatureID appears to appear in place of sosa:result

Is there a separate table/class for samples, or does this attribute just loop back to another row in the Feature table (I'm not fully familiar with E-R diagrams)

*Attribute

• Why is the value called 'result'?

• Is there a relationship between *Attribute::attribute and Observation::parameter?