Skip to content

RFC: Portolan as a pure STAC profile (v0.2.0) — thin index, derived capabilities, no Portolan extension#642

Draft
jatorre wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
rfc/pure-profile-v0.2.0
Draft

RFC: Portolan as a pure STAC profile (v0.2.0) — thin index, derived capabilities, no Portolan extension#642
jatorre wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
rfc/pure-profile-v0.2.0

Conversation

@jatorre

@jatorre jatorre commented Jul 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

RFC / discussion PR — not for merge as-is

Proposal to converge Portolan on "STAC as a thin index" after the 2026-07-09 workshop.

This PR adds only a proposal — it does not rewrite any canonical spec/ file:

  • context/shared/adr/0057-portolan-pure-profile.md — the decision record (Status: Proposed)
  • spec/rfc/pure-profile-v0.2.0/ — the full RFC, draft conformance.md + capabilities.md, and a
    validated, STAC-Browser-rendered reference example set (buildings single-table + cadastre
    multi-table model with OSI semantics)

The gist

  • No Portolan STAC extension — every field is derivable or already homed elsewhere.
  • Identity + version via conformsTo; capabilities derived, not declared (contract per capability).
  • Drop portolan:geospatial; bbox is uniformly an AOI.
  • AGENTS.md + README.md replace llms.txt (supersedes ADR-0052).
  • Multi-table models = one collection, tables as assets; relations in OSI (incl. spatial-predicate).
  • Visualization = capability + contract, not a mandated format (the PMTiles debate).

Evidence

stac-node-validator v2.0.0-rc.3 → 3/3 pass (all extensions incl. proposed osi:relations);
renders in STAC Browser v5.0.0-rc.1.

Asks

  1. React to the direction (ADR-0057) — merge as one or split into 5 focused PRs (see RFC).
  2. The PMTiles reframe (capability + contract).
  3. Four core judgment calls (schema MUST/SHOULD · versions.json core vs capability · format allowlist · per-collection docs).

Add ADR-0057 + spec/rfc/pure-profile-v0.2.0/ (RFC, draft conformance.md &
capabilities.md, and a validated reference example set). Proposal only; no
canonical spec files are rewritten. See ADR-0057 for the summary.
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: a94b9c6c-7b53-4c2b-9bf1-5f8bfa70cc6a

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch rfc/pure-profile-v0.2.0

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant