...
Note that an important part of ADAPT is data-driven, so vocabulary entries, whole vocabularies, and variable definitions can be added without users having to change versions of ADAPT in their software. This has been engineered as a very IT-department friendly feature of ADAPT.
How does ADAPT differ from ISO 11783?
The ADAPT framework incorporates a "superset" of data models used in the industry (to ensure system interoperability). As such, the goal is to incorporate ISO requirements as part of a larger industry context. One other important difference: the ADAPT framework has a larger scope than ISO 11783, namely more business needs related to Field Operations data than just the transactions that occur between FMIS and MICS systems.
How does ADAPT differ from ESRI Shapefile format?
The ESRI Shapefile format has been used to exchange Field Operations data in many cases. A key limitation to this approach is the need for the user interaction - that the various attributes contained in a shapefile need to be "mapped" to the system of interest to ensure interoperability. This fundamental requirement creates an inherent limitation on user adoption - basically constraining usage to individuals that are comfortable managing this level of detail. The industry will struggle to attract other participants that desire a "lower tech" solution if we continue to rely on loosely defined Shapefile attributes.
I've read that ADAPT is linked to a lot of standards (ISO 11783, ISO 19156, etc.) How does this help me?
...