[Proposal] More comprehensive description of exposure data

[stufraser1]

What is the context or reason for the change?

Currently the exposure specific part of the standard lacks information that exists for hazard/vuln/loss on how the data is generated. It only denotes the category, taxonomy used, and metric dimension and quantity kind.

Why is this not covered by the existing model?

Previous focus on defining most exposure informatino as data, leavings only definition of metric, quantity, category and taxonomy in metadata.

What is your proposed change?

Add some methodological description fields to complement the data sources that can be listed for the exposure data type.
Data_level: (required): aggregated, feature (asset polygon or polyline), mix agg/feature.
Aggregation_type: (optional): Administrative unit, Tile/gridcell (adm unit link back to spatial gazzeteer?)
Aggregation_grids: (optional): Quadtree, hexagon.
Source_types: (optional, one or many): cadastre; earth observation; census, + +
Attributes_included (optional, one or many): location, occupancy, construction, height, age, further details. [as a general view of what is included]
Highest_level_geolocation: (optional): Country, State, County, Postalcode, StreetAddress, lon/lat [need to consider wording - i.e. state, county equivalents in different countries]
Lon/lat_type: (optional): centroid, vertex, node ??

Can you provide an example?