Upload
julius-howard-logan
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Geospatial Standardsin Action
A National Workshop Series
Presented by Doug Nebert, FGDCCo-presented by Steve Blake, ANZLIC
Workshop Series
Date Place Contact07 Oct 2002 Hobart Michael Varney 08 Oct 2002 Melbourne Cathy Chipchase09 Oct 2002 Canberra Paul Treloar & 10 Oct2002 Canberra Ehsan Ullah11 Oct 2002 Adelaide Yvonne Weir14 Oct 2002 Perth Tessa Pittendrigh16 Oct 2002 Brisbane Adeline Yuksel 17 Oct 2002 Sydney Paul Mitchell 18 Oct 2002 Wellington Merita Lau Young
Workshop SeriesSponsored by:
Typical Standards Issues
• Where do I go to find out which standards exist and if they are adopted broadly?
• Where do “retired” and “superseded” standards go to rest?
• How can I feed into the standards setting process?
• What’s the difference between a catalog, a directory, a registry, a repository and a service registry?
Outline of Workshop 1. Introduction re: context of “Geospatial
Standards in Action" within the ASDI - Steve
2. OGC, ISO, FGDC, ANZLIC and WWWC and how they all inter-relate - Doug;
3. What's big at the moment? - Doug• XML & GML Ver 3.0• ISO 19100 series• UML – Conceptual schema language• Web Services & Service Registries
Outline of Workshop 4. What other standards are important? -
Doug
• ISO;
• WWWC;
• OGC;
• Etc
Outline of Workshop 5. How do we implement standards? - Doug• Pilots• Testbeds• Profiles• Specifications• Formal “Standards”• Standards bodies (eg. Standards Australia)• Reference Implementations• COTS products
Outline of Workshop 6. How are these standards being applied in the
NSDI and CGDI? - Doug7. Recommendations for Australia/ NZ in terms of
implementing a national SDI - Doug8. Summary of presentation & examples of
Australian activities – Steve9. Conclusions - Steve10. Question & Answer Session – Doug & Steve
The Reasons for Holding this Workshop
• Individual’s own work (GIS, image processing, shared on-line resources) & need to integrate datasets and systems;
• The ASDI Distribution Network concept – allow some planning certainty;
• The maturing of several standards & specification setting processes;
The Reasons for Holding this Workshop • The rise of Web Services and Geospatial
Web Services as mainstream;• Tyrany of distance – Australian
involvement in the Stds setting and specification development process;
• Awareness of where standards are at (formalised, draft in-progress, forgotten!);
• Unsure how the standards inter-relate and support one another;
The Reasons for Holding this Workshop • Unsure of the difference between a
standard, a specification and a reference implementation;
• What is the relationship between ISO, Stds Aust/NZ, OpenGIS Consortium, World Wide Web Consortium, NOIE etc. are they complimentary or competing;
• When and how does a standard find its way into COTS products?
The Reasons for Holding this Workshop
• Managed to finally throw a net over Doug and bring him to these shores;
• TC211 has largely completed the core standards work 19101 – 19120;
• Standard after 19120 are largely stamping OGC specifications;
• “The good thing about standards is there are so many of them to choose from!”
ASDI Conceptual “Standards Framework”ASDI Conceptual “Standards Framework”
UsersUsers
InterfacesInterfaces
ApplicationsApplications
DirectoriesDirectories
InterfacesInterfaces
ServicesProvider
ServicesProvider
DatabasesDatabases DatabasesDatabases
ISO 19100 DATA STANDARDS
MetadataEncodingClassificationFeature CatalogSpatial Reference systemGazetteerGeocoderGeoparseretc.
OpenGISSPECIFICATIONS
OGC Client Data ModelOGC Catalog ServicesOGC Web Map ServerOGC Web Feature ServerOGC Web Coverage ServerGML etc.
WWWC STANDARDS
XMLhttpSVGPDF, etc.
CatalogsCatalogs
ASDIDISTRIBUTION
NETWORK
DA
TA
FO
CU
S
TE
CH
NO
LOG
Y E
NA
BLE
RS
ANZLIC’s Role
• Not operational!! in the sense of IT systems;
• Maintaining software has not been an easy experience;
• Determine the user (Govt/ jurisdictional) needs and summarise (eg. metadata profile);
The ANZLIC “Enabling” Layer
PolicyPolicyDriversDrivers
ProjectsProjects
Data, Information & TechnologiesData, Information & Technologies
ASDI Distribution NetworkASDI Distribution Network
ANZLIC FrameworkANZLIC Framework
ANZLICANZLICLayerLayer
ANZLIC’s Role
• Develop the policy environment to allow the projects (under the ASDI banner) to occur and flourish;
• Create the institutional arrangements necessary;
• Communicate best-practice;
• Draw on international expertise;
ANZLIC’s Role • Partner with industry (ASIBA) and the
professions (SSC);
• Help stimulate the spatial data industry;
• Put “some” resources in to provide impetus;
• Dedicated Standing Committees and Working Groups;
• A forum for ideas sharing
Providing the Context
• Standards need context!
ClearinghouseClearinghouse
GeoparserGeoparser
Advancing Spatial Data Infrastructure Via Interoperable Web & Location Based Services
• Reduce Reduce deployment costs deployment costs by reusing by reusing information from information from other communitiesother communities
• Tools to provide Tools to provide custom information custom information to usersto users
• Foundation for Foundation for interoperable interoperable service networksservice networks
• Easier access to multiple online info sources and servicesEasier access to multiple online info sources and services
• Use and reuse different vendor solutions.Use and reuse different vendor solutions.
VendorData
Local Government
NationalGovernment
OtherCollections
Clearinghouse
WhovilleCedar Lake
WhovilleCedar Lake
BuildingsRoadsImagesTargetsBoundaries ...
CatalogView
Common interfaces enable interoperability
Queries extract info from diverse sources
Integrated View
Gazetteer CoordinateTransform
Web Mapping Server, Web Feature Server, Web Coverage Server Catalog Services
OtherServices
MetadataData
MetadataData
MetadataData
Metadata
Internet
Geoparser
Geocoder
Source: OpenGIS Consortium
The Underlying Theme
• Store once;
• Manage professionally;
• Use many times;
• Within an SDI framework
Single Vendor Solution
Custom integration with limited partners
Difficult to integrate
Higher risk over long term
Moving Away from the ‘Walled Garden’
Source: OpenGIS Consortium
Unlimited number of services
Easier integration with partners
Easier integration of other application services
Flexible enough to support new technologies
Toward the ‘Open Platform’ approach
Source: OpenGIS Consortium
ASDI Distribution Network
• Seamless access to spatial data and information services that can be accessed and used by anyone, anywhere;
• Improvements in the cost effective and efficient delivery of data and information services to a broad range of users from all data distributors, regardless of their size;
• Ensure custodians retain specified rights and responsibilities for their data accessed from the ASDI-DN;
ASDI Distribution Network
• Ensure privacy and security of data and protection of property rights;
• A common architecture using open systems technologies and standards to facilitate interoperability will be used to guide implementation and use of the ASDI-DN.
Example of an OGC Pilot ProjectExample of an OGC Pilot Project
Source: OpenGIS Consortium
Functional Model
Bind
Find Publish
Broker
Client Service
Registry
Based on the Generic Web Services Model
Bind
Find Publish
Registry
ClientService
Data CatalogService RegistriesData modelsVocabulariesSymbolisation rules
DataStylingGazetteerAuthenticationGeocoding
ChainValue AddIntegration
Thin Client
Thick Client
Web BrowserHosted Application
Plug-insMobile Devices
Desktop GIS
Value Added Providers
Users
Providers
InfrastructureServices
Example Pilot Project Computational View
Data Type
Registry
Data InstanceRegistry
Service Type
Registry
Data Services Portrayal Services
Registry Services
Application Clients
BindFind
Publish
WFSWFS
Terrain ViewerTerrain Viewer
Encodings & Protocols
Annot. ViewerAnnot. Viewer
Service InstanceRegistry
XIMAXIMA SLDSLD
WTSWTSWCSWCS
ValueAdd
ValueAdd
SensorML
DiscoverDiscover MapViewerMap
Viewer
SSL &X.509SSL &X.509
WFST+WFST+
GMLGML
ServiceMetadataService
Metadata
WMSWMSCoveragePortrayalService
= Enhanced
= New
Source: OpenGIS Consortium
ASDI Distribution Network
• Network of distribution services, service providers and data storage facilities maintained by government agencies, private sector, academia, community organisations etc;
• The Internet is used as the principal delivery mechanism for data and services;
• Services are provided for the discovery, viewing and access to data;
ASDI Distribution Network
• Interoperability of search and access mechanisms is provided across multiple data distributors;
• Data and services providers have the flexibility to provide one or many views to their data, while controlling access to their data holdings
© 2001, OGC Inc.. All Rights Reserved© 2001, OGC Inc.. All Rights Reserved 2929
Profiles: Common Architecture StackProfiles: Common Architecture Stack
ServiceIntegration &
Workflow
ServiceDiscovery
ServiceDescription
Service
Data Format,Schema andSemantics
DataRepresentation
& Encoding
Communication Protocols
TCP/IP, HTTP, SSL, SMTP, FTP,IIOP, etc.
ASCII, ASN.1/DER, XML, etc.
HTML, XML/S, RDF, XMI, OGC-GML,OGC-WKT/WKB, etc.
OGC SF, Coverage, Coordinate Transform,WMS, etc.HTTP, SOAP, COM, CORBA, SQL, J2EE, etc.
WSDL,ISO-19119, etc.
UDDI, OGC-Catalog, etc.
WSFL, XLANG, ISO19119
Interoperability Layers Interoperability Standards
Connectivity
Interoperability
DCP
The Services Interoperability Stack
• A “protocol stack”;
• A layered architecture of technology and standards on which services can be implemented and deployed;
• Lowest level of the stack enable connectivity of software components by enabling them to bind, send & receive messages via publish-find-bind mechanisms;
The Services Interoperability Stack
• Higher levels in the stack enable interoperability and via publish-find-bind mechanisms, allow software components to work together
• Standards in the stack are all mainstream OGC, NOIE, WWC and ISO-endorsed stds
Inte
rope
rabi
lity
Sta
ck
Requestor
ASDI DN Conceptual Model
Registor
Bind
Find
Provider
ServiceIntegration &
Workflow
ServiceDiscovery
ServiceDescription
Service
Data Format,Schema andSemantics
DataRepresentation
& Encoding
CommunicationProtocols
TCP/IP, HTTP, SSL, FTP, etc.
ASCII, XML, etc.
HTML, XML/S, RDF, XMI, OGC-GML,etc.
Coordinate Transform, WMS, WFS, etc.HTTP, SOAP, COM, CORBA, SQL, J2EE, etc.
WSDL,ISO-19119, ISO-19115,Z39.50 etc.
UDDI, OGC-Catalog, Z39.50 etc.
WSFL, XLANG, ISO19119, ISO-19115
Interoperability Layers Interoperability Standards
Connectivity
Interoperability
Binding
Publish
NOIE Interoperability Framework
“The development of an Interoperability framework will underpin the provision of integrated services by articulating a set of agreed policies and standards to allow electronic information and transactions to operate seamlessly across agencies and jurisdictions”.
NOIE Interoperability Framework
Source: NOIE web site
Processing ServicesExamples of Spatial Services
• Coordinate conversion service
• Coordinate transformation service
• Web mapping service
• Orthorectification service
• Spatial subsetting service
• Feature matching service
• Route determination service
About the Workshop Leader • Doug Nebert is the Clearinghouse
Coordinator for the FGDC Secretariat in Reston, Virginia;
• Doug has worked for the past 18 years for the U.S. Geological Survey, first on water resources applications of geographic information systems, then metadata standards and software, and finally, with the FGDC on standardised methods of GIS data dissemination to promote discovery and re-use;
About the Workshop Leader • Chairs the Catalog and Architecture
Working Groups of the OpenGIS Consortium (FGDC is a Principal Strategic member of the OpenGIS Consortium);
• Chairs the Technical Working Group of the GSDI. He is the Information Architect for the U.S. Geospatial One-Stop Initiative (one of 24 e-government initiatives);
About the Workshop Leader • Holds a Bachelors Degree in
Environmental Studies from Evergreen State College (Olympia, Washington) and a Masters of Science in Geography from Portland State University (Portland, Oregon)
• Pilot!
So Many Standards
OGC, ISO, FGDC, ANZLIC, W3C – how do they interrelate?
Why Geo Standards?
• Standardization lets peers communicate
• Minimizes cost of uptake of new information
• Maximizes utility and stability of information products
• Permits more applications to operate under known conditions
Introduction to Standardization Organizations
• Many standardization activities exist with different roles and responsibilities that are relevant to implementing SDIs:– International Organisation of Standardization
(ISO TC 211, TC 204, JTC-1)– World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)– OpenGIS Consortium (OGC)– National Standards Organizations
Roles of Consensus Organizations
• ISO provides general purpose standards and specifications as guidance to implementation
• Industry Consortia provide technical implementation specifications
• National/Community groups define common practices, content, and interaction within and outside the group
Geospatial Standardization
OpenGIS OpenGIS Consortium, W3CConsortium, W3C
Software interfaces(ImplementationSpecifications)
ISO TC 211ISO TC 211
Foundations forimplementation.
(Abstract standards)
NationalNationalStandardsStandards
Content standards,Authority for data
Endorsed practices and specification
s
SDISDI
OtherNSDIs
RegionalSDI Coordination
GSDI
ISO TC211 Background
• 29 participating (voting) nations
• 27 observing nations
• 22 external liaison organizations
• First Plenary Norway, 1994
• Next 15th will be in Korea, November 2002
• 37 work items initiated
• 20 to be published by end of 2002
ISO TC211 Work Items
World Wide Web Consortium
• Mission: “to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability.”
• A Recommendation is work that represents consensus within W3C and has the Director's stamp of approval. W3C considers that the ideas or technology specified by a Recommendation are appropriate for widespread deployment and promote W3C's mission.
• Such specifications developed within W3C must be formally approved by the Membership. Consensus is reached after a specification has proceeded through the review stages of Working Draft, Proposed Recommendation, and Recommendation.
W3C Contributions
• HTML• HTTP• PNG• SOAP/XMLP• SVG• URI/URL• XHTML• XLink
• XML• XML Query• XML Schema • XPath• XPointer• XSL and XSLT• CSS• DOM
OpenGIS Consortium• Focus on interoperability of
software at the interface level to promote plug-and-play components for geographic information interchange
• Not-for-profit, international consortium
• 220+ industry, government, NGO and university members
OGC VisionOGC Vision
A world in which A world in which everyone benefits everyone benefits
fromfromgeographic geographic
information and information and services made services made
available available across any network, across any network,
application, or application, or platform.platform.
OGC MissionOGC Mission
Our core mission is to Our core mission is to deliverdeliver
spatial interface spatial interface specificationsspecifications
that are openly that are openly available for global available for global
use.use.
OGC Programs
• Specification Development Program -similar to other Industry consortia (W3C, OMG, etc.).
• Interoperability Program (IP) - a global, innovative, hands-on engineering and testing program designed to accelerate interface development and bring interoperability to the market.
• Outreach and Community Adoption Program – education and training, encourage take up of OGC interfaces, business development,
OGC Specifications• Simple Features Access (SQL, CORBA, OLE)• Catalog Services• Grid Coverages• Coordinate Transformation Services• Web Map Server Interfaces• Geography Markup Language• Web Feature Service• Filter Encoding Specification• Styled Layer Descriptor
Establish definition of and terms of engagement in *SDI
Interactions
ISO
TC 211 TC 204
JTC-1
National Standards
Organizations
Provideexpertise &candidate stds.
Review &approvestds.
Adopter/Implementer Community
Adopter/Implementer Community
OpenGISConsortium
(OGC)
World WideWeb Consortium
(W3C)
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Facilitation Bodies• GSDI• ANZLIC• PCGIAP• FGDC • PAIGH• INSPIRE• GeoConnections• CODI/UNECA• AGI• …
W3C: HTTP, PNG, RDF, SOAP/XMLP (Web Services Activity), XML, Xlink, Xpath, Xpointer, XSL/XSLT, XML Schema
OGC: Web Map Server, Web Feature Server, GML, Web Coverage Server, Style Layer Descriptor, Catalog Service
ISO: Ref Model, Terminology, Conformance testing, Profiles, Spatial Schema, Temporal Schema, Feature Cataloguing Methodology, Spatial Ref by Coords and Ids, Quality, Metadata, WMS, GML, LBS, Registration of Geo-information Items
Metadata Profile, Data Content Standards, etc.
Class A liaison
XML Protocol (XMLP),XML Signature, I18N
Class C Liaison:XML, I18N
Community Coordination
• FGDC and GeoConnections provide national fora for agreement on the common adoption of a suite of standards and practices that as a whole will function as a Spatial Data Infrastructure
• The Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI) initiative seeks to promote compatible SDIs worldwide
Scope of National Solutions
• Data Content Standards
• Geographic Location Gazetteer
• Geodetic Reference Systems
• Feature Type Catalogs
• National Information Profiles of International Standards
• Data Policies and Laws
Navigating the minefield
• Standardization should be a least-cost means of establishing a common means of interaction between participants in a process
• Community facilitators such as ANZLIC can play a critical role in building consensus on a requirements-based architecture and then specifying the context of relevant standards, specs, and practices to be adopted
The players
ISO
StandardsAustralia
Adopter/Implementer Community
Adopter/Implementer Community
OpenGISConsortium
(OGC)World Wide
Web Consortium(W3C)
ANZLIC &AURISA
Users ASDIblueprint
Policies,Agreements,Technologies
Coordination
Prominent standards and specifications relevant to
geospatial activities
Douglas Nebert, FGDC Secretariat
Prominent Topics
• Unified Modeling Language (UML)
• ISO 19100 Series standards
• W3C Recommendations
• OGC Specifications
• Other: SOAP and UDDI
Problem: The ability to exchange software and data models between software development (CASE) systems and data in a system-and vendor-neutral manner
Solution: Unified Modeling Language (UML)
Evidence: Support by software design and CASE environment, ISO TC 211 endorsed conceptual schema language
What is UML?• Unified Modeling Language• UML is an industry standard language for
visualizing, specifying, constructing, and documenting artifacts of a software-intensive system
• Platform-neutral environment for abstract modeling of data and processes
• Adopted as the Conceptual Schema Language for ISO TC 211
UML Diagrams
Use CaseDiagramsUse Case
DiagramsUse CaseDiagrams
ScenarioDiagramsScenario
DiagramsCollaborationDiagrams
StateDiagramsState
DiagramsComponentDiagrams
ComponentDiagramsComponent
DiagramsDeploymentDiagrams
StateDiagramsState
DiagramsObjectDiagrams
ScenarioDiagramsScenario
DiagramsStatechartDiagrams
Use CaseDiagramsUse Case
DiagramsSequenceDiagrams
StateDiagramsState
DiagramsClassDiagrams
ActivityDiagrams
Models
Class Diagram• Captures the ‘vocabulary’ of a system
• Built and refined throughout development
• Purpose– Name and model concepts in the system– Specify collaborations– Specify logical database schemas
• Developed by analysts, designers, and implementers
UML Class Diagram
The UML• Useful for diagramming systems, objects,
and relationships• Many diagrammatic conventions• Many ways to diagram the same thing• Can serialize the UML as XML (XMI)• CASE tools or transforming programs can
create implementation bindings• FGDC is sponsoring a UML-to-GML
transform program for data schemas
W3C Recommendations
• XML: eXtensible Markup Language
• XML Schema: Validation reference for XML
• XSL/XSLT: XML Style Language/Transform
• SOAP/XMLP: Simple Object Access Protocol, XML-Protocol
XML is a family of technologies for data handling
XML
Resource Description Framework (RDF)
XSLTXPointer
XLink
SVG (Graphics)
XML Schema (XSD)
(Web Services Description Language)
WSDL
The XML ‘Family’
SOAPXML Protocol
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
Problem: The inability to express a common format and support it with widely available software parsing tools
Solution: XML and XML-Schema provide the context and structure to support encoding of many types of information. XSLT permits the easy transformation of XML
Evidence: Implemented by hundreds of software products and solutions providers
XML 1.0• eXtensible Markup Language is a partial subset
of Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML: ISO 8879:1988)
• Intended to store the structure and relationship of information in a readily parseable format
• Expressed as characters, though element contents can also be numbers or links
• Non-Latin character sets are also supported in XML
<title>My new book</title><author>Knut Hampson</author>
<title dated = “11-Jun-2005”>My new book</title><author>Knut Hampson</author>
Elements can have modifiers called attributes.
Things in angle brackets are called elements or tags </title> indicates closing of the element !!
How is XML structured?
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
Document Structure Description
(or Document Type Declaration DTD)
<book> <title>Hunger</title> <author> <first>Knut</first> <last>Hamson</last> </author> <chapter> It was bitter cold this morning. Bitter cold. </chapter></book>
XML Source Document
<!element book(title, author, chapter*)>
<!element title #PCDATA>
<!element author (first, last) >
<!element last #PCDATA>
<!element first #PCDATA>
<!element chapter #PCDATA>
Validation of XML
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
What is XML Schema ?
• Another more powerful data description language to assist in validation of XML
• It is more precise than (and replaces) a DTD. It is the workhorse of XML!
• Supports data types and restrictions
• Simple and complex structures
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
XML & XML Schema (XSD)
An XML Schema Editor view of a simple telephone schema
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
XML Schema Types by restriction
• Enumerations ( Wattage = (“150W”, “300W”, “400W”)
• Ranges ( elevation is between –500 and 500 )
• Pattern (ParcelID = ( 4 letters (A-W) and then 3 digits.))
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
What is XSLT?
• An XML language developed for transforming XML.
• It is the basis of XML styling !
• XML can be styled (transformed) into HTML, SVG etc.
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
XSLT
• eXtensible Style Sheet Transformations Language
• Declarative match and action language.• Uses the XPath grammar for selection and
navigation.• Widely deployed technology for transforming
XML (MSXML, Xalan, Saxon)
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
XSLT Mechanics
Template Rule Specification
Key element is <xsl:template> that defines the template rules
Template rule says what to match and what action to take !
Style Sheet
<xsl:template match="/"> <xsl:apply-templates select="exp:SubDivision"/></xsl:template><xsl:template match="exp:SubDivision"> <xsl:apply-templates select="gml:featureMember"/></xsl:template><xsl:template match="gml:featureMember"> <xsl:apply-templates
select="exp:LandParcel[@gml:fid='PIN04']"/></xsl:template>
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
XSLT Tools
• XSLT is very widely used.• IE 5.0 has XSLT built-in (MSXML)• XSLT Engines from many sources
– SAXON (Michael Kay – ICL)– Xalan (Apache XML project)– MSXML3 (Microsoft)– 4XSLT (Fourthought)
• XSLT Compilers emerging (Sun)
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
XML + 3 XSL stylesheets =
ISO TC 211 (19100 Series)
• 19103 - Conceptual schema language
• 19107 - Spatial schema
• 19112 - Spatial referencing by geographic identifiers
• 19115 - Metadata
• 19118 - Encoding
• 19119 - Services
Problem: Information exchange between data and service providers requires a common design framework that can be directly encoded
Solution: ISO 19103 Conceptual Schema Language
Evidence: ISO 19100 series of standards all expressed using constrained UML
19103.DIS - Conceptual Schema Language
• Intended to specify the use computer-interpretable models, or schemas, of geographic information in 19100 standards
• Unambiguous abstract schemas are the basis for data interchange and the definition of interoperable services
• Expressed using UML structure diagrams
• 19103 is a Technical Specification
Problem: The representation of geometry and basic spatial operators by different implementations varies subtly in incompatible ways
Solution: ISO 19107 Spatial Schema
Evidence: Adoption of spatial objects and operations by OGC as a common spatial object model
19107.FDIS - Spatial Schema
• Geometry model and operators used by ISO (and harmonized by OGC) model
• Supports 0,1,2,3 dimensions
• Permits specification of topology
• Definition of geometric objects along with well-defined operators assure that results can be comparable within known limitations of accuracy and resolution
Problem: How should information may be associated with named locations without ambiguity?
Solution: ISO 19112 provides a schema to store and reference authoritative place names and codes
Evidence: 19112 being used as the basis for a searchable digital gazetteer
19112.FDIS - Spatial referencing by geographic identifiers
• Features, descriptions, metadata may be associated with either coordinates or by well-known place “identifiers” (names or codes)
• Standard specifies a reference scheme for places, distance along a named feature, adjacent to a feature
• Includes basic constructs for a gazetteer
Problem: Data are documented in drastically different ways by vendor/user and discipline communities
Solution: ISO 19115 Metadata provides structure and meaning to nearly 300 identifiable data properties
Evidence: Main GIS providers already offering an early profile of 19115 for use
19115.FDIS – Metadata • Specifies the definitions, optionality, and
repeatability of descriptions of digital spatial data to promote proper use and effective retrieval of the data
• Includes extension procedures• Standard now does not include the XML
representation• A new Technical Specification will include XML
Schema for more rigorous validation• Estimated approval dates: Q2 2003
Problem: Spatial data need to be transferred from system to system using a reliable and rigorous packaging
Solution: ISO 19118 Encoding specifies how geographic objects can be serialized using XML
Evidence: UML-to-XML converters have been written to create repeatable XML structures
19118.FDIS – Encoding • requirements for creating encoding rules
based on UML schemas,
• requirements for creating encoding services,
• an informative XML based encoding rule for neutral interchange of geographic data.
What encoding yields
Problem: How do we describe and discover geospatial (and other) available services online for both human and computer use?
Solution: ISO 19119 services metadata provides guidance on structures for services and operations
Evidence: Services metadata and registries are still a research topic without consensus
19119.DIS – Services
• Services metadata and structures
• Descriptions of service/operation interface characteristics and supportive structures
• Still must be harmonized with emerging other model approaches (WSDL, ebXML, UDDI)
OpenGIS Top Drawer Specs
• Catalog Services (1.1.1 pending)
• Web Map Service (WMS 1.1.1)
• Geography Markup Language (GML 2.1)
• Web Feature Server (WFS 1.0)
• Filter Specification (Filter 1.0)
• Style Layer Descriptor (SLD 1.0)
Publish, Find, Bind
Catalog
Problem: The ability to search for spatial information using the same set of fields and get similarly structured results from different servers
Solution: OGC Catalog Services
Evidence: Z39.50 implementations, FGDC, ASDD, UK, others
OGC Catalog Services 1.1• Support the search and retrieval of
descriptive information (metadata) on an information resource (dataset, service, schema, etc.)
• Version 1.1 has Implementation Profiles for developing catalogs in CORBA and Z39.50 (ASDD conforms to this)
Catalog Service
DiscoveryService
(mandatory)
DiscoveryOperations
(mandatory)
AccessService
(optional)
AccessOperations(optional)
ManagementService
(optional)
ManagementOperations(optional)
OperationsClasses
Includes init, closefunctions
DirectDirect BrokeredBrokered
CatalogService
CatalogService
Catalog Futures
• Registries work will be folded into and made consistent with Catalog spec in 2003
• Recommendations on support of public service registry APIs (e.g. UDDI) with OGC catalog APIs to come
• Suggest focused test bed with use cases for national data&service/catalog®istry
The Ideal Catalog Service
DataCatalogEntry
GenerateMetadata
link to
DataObject
ServiceInstance
data served by service
service referenced by data
ServiceCatalogEntry
GenerateMetadata
link to
Catalog Service
Internet
association
Problem: To make a request for a map from different map services regardless of vendor using the same request language
Solution: OGC Web Map Server interface
Evidence: Broad commercial implementation as an add-on to proprietary map services
OGC Web Map Server 1.1.1
• Establishes a common vocabulary for the request and delivery of a raster graphic based on a number of parameters using GET/POST
• Three operations:– Capabilities: returns service and layer information– Map: returns map based on request arguments– FeatureInfo: returns attribute information for the
selected feature(s)
• Now supports SLD reference to apply custom style to layer
Web Browser
IntegrativeWeb Server
getMapgetMap
WMS Interface WMS Interface
Request Response with single orMultiple maps as GIF/JPEG
Software A
DataData
Data Data
Data
Software B
DataData
Data Data
Data
Client
GetMap Request Example:
http://b-maps.com/map.cgi?WMTVER=1.0.0&REQUEST=map&SRS=EPSG%3A4326&BBOX=-97.105,24.913,78.794,36.358&WIDTH=560&HEIGHT=350&LAYERS=BUILTUPA_1M%3ACubeWerx,COASTL_1M%3ACubeWerx,POLBNDL_1M%3ACubeWerx&STYLES=0XFF8080,0X101040,BLACK&FORMAT=PNG&BGCOLOR=0xFFFFFF&TRANSPARENT=FALSE&EXCEPTIONS=INIMAGE&QUALITY=MEDIUM
http://b-maps.com/map.cgi?WMTVER=1.0.0&REQUEST=map&SRS=EPSG%3A4326&BBOX=-97.105,24.913,78.794,36.358&WIDTH=560&HEIGHT=350&LAYERS=AVHRR-09-27%3AMIT-mbay,BUILTUPA_1M%3ACubeWerx,COASTL_1M%3ACubeWerx,POLBNDL_1M%3ACubeWerx&STYLES= default,0XFF8080,0X101040,BLACK&FORMAT=PNG&BGCOLOR=0xFFFFFF&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&EXCEPTIONS=INIMAGE&QUALITY=MEDIUM
GetMap Request Example:
Problem: No vendor-independent way to format vector feature and attribute information for exchange over the Web
Solution: Geography Markup Language (GML)
Evidence: Commercial implementations and national service implementations (Ordnance Survey, UK)
Geography Markup Language (GML 2.1.2)
• OGC “Adopted Specification” (GML 2.1.2 currrent) for encoding spatial information.
• A set of XML technologies (schema fragments) for expressing spatial data on the Internet.
• Emerging international standard for spatial data—endorsed by 200 + companies and agencies around the world.
• Propose GML Version 3.0 by early 2003
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
GML What is it?
• A data transport.• A schema language.
– Information Communities– Types for Web-Services
• A storage model for linked data spanning multiple servers.
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
Why GML ?
• GML is easily transformed – coordinate conversion, schema conversion, presentation conversion
• GML is non-proprietary and open! Any client can talk to any server!
• GML enables non-proprietary web feature servers, image/map annotation, map styling and spatial analysis.
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
GML Technical Objectives• Encode geometry of geo-spatial features.• Provide a schema language for geo-spatial
features.• Encode non-geometric properties of spatial
features.• Encode feature relationships and feature
topology.• Encode temporal evolution of features and
feature properties.
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
GML Encoding – XML Schema
You must create an application schema !!
GML Application Schema
GML Instance Document
Written as XML Schema + GML Rules !! Describes feature types !
GML description of the feature instances
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
Feature : named list of properties
FeatureType (road)
name
description
geometry
length
direction
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
GML Feature
GML Namespace
<exp:Building fid = “st100”><exp:noFloors>100</exp:noFloors><exp:use>Residential</exp:use>< exp: surfaceArea>100000</exp:surfaceArea>< exp: frontsOn>Georgia Street</exp:frontsOn><exp:streetNumber>1150</exp:streetNumber><gml:locationOf>
<gml:Point srsName = “ … “><gml:coordinates>55661.1454,
454656.67</gml:coordinates></gml:Point>
</gml:locationOf></ exp: Building>
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
What’s coming in GML ?
• GML 3.0 – Anticipated for 2003• Also new work item: ISO19136• Converge with G-XML (Japan)• Many new features including:
» Topology » 3D and non-linear geometries» Coverages» Temporal support» Metadata support» Units of Measure» Default Styling» Points of Interest
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
Problem: No consistent way to request and receive well-known packages of vector information as a Web service
Solution: OGC Web Feature Server provides for request and response of vector data
Evidence: OGC WFS recently approved but beta implementations available from main GIS vendors
OGC Web Feature Server 1.0• Provides discovery and request interfaces
for selecting “vector” spatial data and their attributes
• May use OGC Filter Expression or other query language
• Returns “raw” data structures as ASCII, XML, GML
• May support transactional locking
WFSFeature access/modification
App. ServerPresentation/Analysis Client
OPERATIONS:
• Describe Capabilities• Describe Feature Schema• Get a Feature• Insert a Feature• Update a Feature• Delete a Feature• Modify Feature Schema• Lock Features
RETURN :
• Capabilities (XML)• Feature Schema (XML/S)• Feature + Attribute (XML- GML)• Feature Transaction (XML- GML)
REQUEST:
• GetCapabilities• DescribeFeatureType• Query• Transaction (insert, modify, delete)• Lock Feature• Schema Synchronization
OGC Web Feature ServerSpecifications V 1.0.0)
WFS
OGC Web Feature Server
OGC Filter Specification• XML encoding of OGC Common Catalog Query
Language (CQL) as a system neutral representation of a query predicate.
• Does not specify the contents, only the result set• Permits decomposition of a neutral query into
other query languages and environments such as: – XML Xpath Expressions– SQL “WHERE” clause
• A large class of OpenGIS web based service require the ability to express filter expressions in XML.
Filter as a Common Query Language
XMLDB
WFS
SQLDB
Xpath Expression
SQL Expression
Filter Expression
Client Filter Expression
transform
transform
transform
Filter Expression Example<Filter> <And> <Within> <PropertyName>WKB_GEOM</PropertyName> <Polygon name="1" srsName="EPSG:4326"> <outerBoundaryIs> <LinearRing> <coordinates>-98.5485,24.2633 ...</coordinates> </LinearRing> </outerBoundaryIs> </Polygon> </Within> <PropertyIsBetween> <PropertyName>ELEVATION</PropertyName> <LowerBoundary>400</LowerBoundary> <UpperBoundary>800</UpperBoundary> </PropertyIsBetween> </And></Filter>
Find all properties between 400 and 800melevation that fall within aselection polygon.
Problem: When requesting a map from a WMS, there is little control over symbology that the user can express
Solution: OGC Styled Layer Descriptor is an XML stylesheet that a map server can apply to deliver custom map styles
Evidence: New specification but commercial beta implementations now exist
Styled Layer Descriptor (SLD)• Specification for an XML file to apply styles based on
selection criteria against a feature service (typically WFS)
• Style sheet for symbolizing vector or raster data• Not an interface specification
Web Browser
WMS Client
Web Feature Server
SLD Doc
Web Map
Server
GetMap
Map Features
GetFeature
FetchReference XML
Using an SLD
references Add to WMS “get” request:SLD=reference_SLD_URL
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> <!DOCTYPE StyledLayerDescriptor (View Source for full doctype...)> <!-- Automatically generated on Fri Nov 16 13:44:48 EST 2001 --> <StyledLayerDescriptor version="0.7.1"> <NamedLayer name="VEGETAT_A:nrcan"> <UserStyle name="Topographic"> <IsDefault>1</IsDefault> <Rule> <Title>Wooded Area</Title> <Filter> <SqlExpression>ATC = 1412</SqlExpression> </Filter> <PolygonSymbol> <Fill> <Color>#D1FFD9</Color> </Fill> </PolygonSymbol> </Rule>
SLD Example
OGC WMS Using SLD
OGC WMS Using SLD
Rendering• Map server
Client• Web Browser• Application
Feature Delivery• Feature Server
Application
Map Server service
Feature Server service
Chaining/Stacking OGC Services
Feature Access• Native DBMS
WMS interface
WFS interface
SFA interface
Simple Feature Access Server
Other Standards
• Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP)
• Web Services Definitions Language (WSDL)
SOAP – Simple Object Access Protocol
SOAP provides an XML envelope for
your message
“I can deliver your message
over HTTP, HTTP/S or SMTP “
Your message
What is SOAP ?• A messaging protocol: an XML syntax for sending messages over the Internet via HTTP, SMTP, etc.
• The foundation of web-based services (RPC & document exchange)
• W3C work item to move SOAP to the XML Protocol (XMLP)
•Fundamental part of Microsoft .NET
© Galdos Systems Inc. April 2002
SOAP Design
SOAP Message
HTTP Headers
SOAP Envelope
SOAP Header
SOAP Body
<soap:envelope> <soap:header>
</soap:header> <soap:body> XML DATA GOES HERE </soap:body></soap:envelope>
Two types of SOAP
SOAP Client
SOAP Service
SOAP RPC Handler passes request and connects to procedureClient blocked until response
received
SOAP Client
SOAP Service
SOAP Message
Do an action
Asynchronous Request
Why SOAP ?
• Simple, extensible, platform-independent (cf. COM or CORBA)
• Works across firewalls since it is transported over HTTP and HTTP/S.
• Widely supported in commercial tools.
• Many language bindings are available: Java, C++, Python, Perl, etc.
Web Services Definition Language - WSDL
• An XML language for describing web-based services (an IDL of sorts).
• It addresses the ‘how’ and ‘where’ of accessing a web-based service
Client-Service Catalog Interaction
Client
Service Catalog
ServiceA
ServiceB
RegisterMe
Registry Acknowledge
PublishFindService
Service Description(WSDL)
Find
Invoke
serviceInvoke
service
Bind
What is UDDI?• A project to speed interoperability and
adoption for web services– Standards-based specifications for service
description and discovery– Shared operation of a business registry on the
web
• Partnership among industry and business leaders
• Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration
UDDI – a global business registry!
• Describes Businesses
• Their service offerings, and
• The means by which one can connect to a service
• Provides pointers to service type descriptions (e.g. access points or addresses of the service)
Registry Data
• Businesses register public informationabout themselves
• Standards bodies, Programmers, Businesses register information about their Service Types
WhitePages
YellowPages
GreenPages
Service TypeRegistrations
UDDI at Work
Harbour Metals createsonline website with local ASP
1.SydneyNet.com
Marketplaces and search enginesquery UBR, cache Harbour Metals data, and bind to its services
3. Consumers and businesses discover Harbour Metals and do business with it
4.
2.
ASP registersHarbour Metals with UBR
UDDI Registry
IBM
Ariba
Microsoftother
other
Registry Operation
• Peer nodes (websites)
• Companies registerwith any node
• Registrations replicatedon a daily basis
• Complete set of“registered” recordsavailable at all nodes
• Common set ofSOAP APIs supportedby all nodes
• Compliance enforced bybusiness contract
UDDI.org
queries
UDDI and SOAP
User UDDI
SOAP Request
UDDISOAP Response
UDDI RegistryNode
HTTPServer
SOAPProcessor
UDDIRegistry Service
B2B DirectoryCreate, View, Update, and Deleteregistrations Implementation-
neutral
Limitations of UDDI
• Data content is only inferred by associating a taxonomy value with a service offering, thus one service can be generally classified for browse or search
• Relationship between the service instance information and data catalogs still needs to be resolved
What’s Coming
Geospatial initiatives, standards, and specs on the horizon
ISO 19100 Series Specification Name
Description
ISO 19104 - Terminology
This document gives definitions for harmonized terms used within the 19100 family of standards.
ISO 19109 - Rules for application schema
The use of a formal application schema for representing geographic information will enable the development of physical implementations and data interchange facilities.
ISO 19110 – Feature Cataloguing Methodology
A framework for organizing and reporting the classification of real world phenomena in a set of geographic data. The feature catalogue for a given dataset is included or referenced in its metadata.
Additional 19100 Series Specification Name
Description
ISO TR19121 – Imagery and gridded data
Identifies those aspects of imagery and gridded data that have been standardized or are being standardized in other ISO committees and external standards organizations
ISO 19123 – Schema for coverage geometry and functions
Defines a conceptual schema for the spatial characteristics of coverages. Coverages include rasters, triangulated irregular networks, point coverages, and polygon coverages.
ISO 19127 - 127 - Geodetic codes and parameters
Defines rules for populating tables of geodetic codes and parameters and identifies the data elements required within these tables, consistent with the conceptual schema in ISO 19111.
OGC Specs as ISO Standards
• ISO 19125 - Simple feature access – Part 1-3ISO 19125 - Simple feature access – Part 1-3• ISO 19128 - Web Map Server InterfaceISO 19128 - Web Map Server Interface• ISO 19129 - Imagery, gridded and coverage dataISO 19129 - Imagery, gridded and coverage data
frameworkframework• ISO 19130 - Sensor and data model for imageryISO 19130 - Sensor and data model for imagery
and gridded dataand gridded data• ISO 19134 - Multimodal location based servicesISO 19134 - Multimodal location based services
for routing and navigationfor routing and navigation• ISO 19136 – Geography Markup Language (GML)ISO 19136 – Geography Markup Language (GML)
W3C Work Items
• XML Protocol – successor to SOAP
• Internationalization I18N
• Resource Description Framework – RDF
• XML Signature
OGC Coming Specifications
Spec Name DescriptionWeb Coverage Service
Extends the Web Map Server (WMS) interface to allow access to geospatial "coverages" that represent values or properties of geographic locations, rather than WMS generated maps (pictures).
Web Terrain Service
The purpose of the Web Terrain Server (WTS) is to produce perspective views of georeferenced data – typically 3-dimensional coverages.
XML for Image and map Annotation (XIMA)
Defines an XML vocabulary to encode annotations on imagery, maps, and other geospatial data. This vocabulary draws on the Geography Markup Language (OpenGIS® GML Recommendation Paper, Revision 2.0.)
Interoperability Program Reports
• OGC members request research and documentation on the resolution of specific issues known as IPRs
• IPRs may result in a new specification, no specification, or a change proposal
• More deliberate process involving the test bed partners
How do we really deploy geo-standards?
Design, Collaborate, Implement
Making standards work for you
• A “standard” is a published way of conducting business; an agreement by which multiple parties can better interact
• There are literally many standards to chose from, and you don’t have to use them all
• Just don’t invent a new methodology if a suitable, supported standard exists!
Flavors of Standards• Standards are both the category and solution• Specifications usually include a subset of instructions to
construct and test a conformant solution• Profile is a constrained specification that is scoped for a
specific purpose or environment• Guidelines usually dictate a general approach or
methodology for consistency in a community• Recommendations denote approval but may behave like
specifications• Technical Reports and IPRs document research into an
area of discourse but usually not a solution• Discussion Papers only provide information for comment
and consideration (not standards)
Where are standards made?• Formal accredited standards bodies
– International Bodies (ISO, IEC, ITU)– National bodies (Standards Australia)– Accredited bodies (ASTM, NISO)
• Industry/community consortia– OpenGIS Consortium– World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)– Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
• Autocracy or monopoly – Adobe PDF– Microsoft Word
How are standards made?
Scoped Problem
Scoped Problem
InputInput
PossibleSolutions
ExistingStandard?
Y
Will itwork?
Tellothers
Y
NN
InputInput
ExperimentationDocumentationInputInput
Review/ReviseInputInput
PublishTellothers
Implementation
CommunityReference
Model
Traditional Process
How are standards made?
Scoped Problem
Scoped Problem
InputInput
PossibleSolutions
ExistingStandard?
Y
Will itwork?
Tellothers
Y
NN
InputInput
ExperimentationDocumentationInputInput
Review/ReviseInputInput
PublishTellothers
Implementation
CommunityReference
Model
Testbed Process
Formal Standards Bodies• International and National standards
organizations rely on voluntary contributions of intellect and time to work out broad agreements
• Approval process very formal• Each nation is a member of ISO, nations
typically nationalize ISO standards• Each nation may accredit other
organizations to build standards under their name
Industry/Community Consortia
• Participation in broad technical organizations such as W3C and OGC should be considered by primary stakeholders
• Two-way representation by community brokers (e.g. FGDC) on consortia improves buy-in, common interests, information dissemination
• Results of consortia may have more industry impact than other standards organizations
Rapid Development Process• OGC (and W3C) use a validated process to
build specifications from an intersection of community practice, tested by prototyping, then documented as a specification– OGC Testbed: Experimental research and prototype
environment– OGC Pilot: On-the-ground deployment of integrated
specifications
• Advantages:– Prototyping leads to more rapid implementation– Industrial consensus worked out in advance
Standards are monolithic yet interdependent
XMLdeployed as
ISOSpatial
Schema
harmonized with
HTTP
used fortransport
GML3.0
may returnWFS1.0
XMLSchema
validates against
validates
UML
expressed in
transformable to
Community Coordination
• Because standards are written independently, the specific usage of certain standards or specifications in a community still needs to be defined
• A Reference Model is suggested to elaborate on the expected dependencies and interrelations within your community
• The U.S., Canada, and Europe are building standards-based reference models that define the terms of interoperability
Reference Implementations• Within a community, standards-based
software may be commissioned or identified to provide a trusted level of entry-level functionality– Software may be free or low-cost within the
identified community– Should exhibit well-known behaviors for
testing of other software– Provides a jump point for development of
commercial and compatible solutions
Commercialization
• To assure rapid uptake and integration of selected standards and specifications, there must be integrated vendor support of the standards– Works in the familiar desktop environment– Permits coupling of distributed systems– Allows access to remote information without need of a
browser
• Let your vendors know of your interest in standards through the Reference Model
Applying standards in Spatial Data Infrastructures
Overview of selected national projects from the US, Canada,
and Europe
Elements of Success
• Operational community commons
• Funding for outreach, education, implementation support
• $5-10 million directly spent annually in US and Canada for coordination, common services deployment, capacity building, small business assistance
SDI Examples
• US Geospatial One-Stop
• Canada GeoConnections
• Geographic Information for Sustainable Development
• UK MasterMap
US Geospatial One-Stop• 1 of 24 e-government initiatives defined by the
Office of Management and Budget to focus on government-to-government geospatial information usage
• Identify existing and planned Framework data assets
• Define rigorous data models and encoding for the seven themes
• Establish web data and mapping services• Create an integrative portal for applications and
human usage
Problem Statement• Existing FGDC data content standards varied in
their approach, detail, scope, modeling methodology and organization
• Existing standards tend to provide only general content guidance at a conceptual level; data content cannot be objectively tested against an abstract model
• Where data encoding (interchange format) for each theme was not defined as part of the standard, there is little potential for interoperable exchange of Framework data without negotiation
Where we want to be• Applications and users are able to discover and
use maps or data served and maintained by a reliable custodian, in real-time over the Web
• The format and structure of the information for a given theme from all providers can appear the same to all customers
• Content and encoding requirements are simple yet useful enough that many providers adopt and serve compliant Framework data
• Data and map services are authoritative, reliable, and are referenced by many customers instead of setting up duplicate services elsewhere
Past and Future
• human request handling
• ftp data access
• web discovery and order
• documentation of local content models
• use of proprietary formats
• little adherence to enforceable standards
• data translation largely the responsibility of the customer
Providers ofTheme X
customer
• automated ad-hoc requests• data and mapping via web services• web discovery, portrayal, and order or access• support of common content models and extended models• support of neutral encoding methods• data packages can be validated against a common reference• data translation shared between provider and customer
Providers ofTheme X
middlewarecommon packaging
services
customer
ReviewState and
E-Gov UserRequirements
Target 22+e-gov initiativesand other e-gov
Face-to-faceTown Hall
Discussions
Call for businessrequirements of
portal
Developconsolidateduse cases
Compose/convene7 MATs
Extract datarequirements
Who?To whom?
When?How?
PublishAnnouncements
on Process
Who?To whom?
When?How?
Initial PortalFunctional
Design
Calls for requirements and participation
Extract commondata
requirements
ConstructDraft Model
Write draftstd docs
ConstructDraft
Standard
PublicReview
Under ANSI INCITS L1
Vote at ANSI INCITS
L1
Vote at ANSI
PublicReview
FGDC Endorsement
revise
revise
e.g. transportation
Prototypespecific
G2G functions
Establishportal interface
to services
Prototypemap/dataservices
Finalizemap/dataservices
refine
Documentexisting andplanned data
Service andData
Clearinghouse
Augmentportal
functionalityrefine
Draft process diagramof Geospatial OneStop
3/01/02
register
time (not to scale)
PrepareQuestions,Organize
Portal Team
Requirements Team
Standards Teams
What is the Geospatial One-Stop Portal?
• Middleware that integrates access to distributed community data services
• Community-wide access point for all participating data and map services
• Employs standard software interfaces to connect to catalog, map, and feature services set up by providers
• Generic user interface that could be adapted by other communities
Portal Concepts
ClientsWFS WMS WCS CatGazGNIS
Internet
@FGDC
Internet
Geospatial One-Stop PortalUser Interface Widgets
Analysis Symbols Help
Web Browser (Thin Client) Applications (Thick Client)
Services
Provider Organizations
Data
Features of a Common Portal• Framework data services via:
– OGC Web Feature Service (WFS) using common schemas
– OGC Web Map Service using Style Layer Descriptors for symbolization
– OGC Web Coverage Service for continuous data– Data download as archived files (ftp/http)
• Supportive Services– Gazetteer Service for placenames as specialized
WFS– Catalog Services (Clearinghouse) for integrated
data and service discovery
Framework Interoperability Pilot for Transportation
• OpenGIS Consortium (OGC) is assisting in modeling process to define proper UML that conforms to ISO rules and can be implemented as GML
• Contract with OGC members to implement Web Feature Services to extend multiple available data systems (U.S. and Canada)
• Implement a Web client that can display and query multiple Framework data sources based on the common data model
• Approach to be followed for other themes
GeoConnections’ Objectives1. Increase the amount of geospatial data,
information and services available on-line;2. Ease data integration issues and data
standardization;3. Expand the use and application of geo-
info4. Promote the development of innovative
technology;5. Simplify the conditions for geo-info use
and resale.
Key Principles/Technical thrusts
• client centered access to information and services
• developed using common national frameworks
• based on international standards,• sustained through collaborative cost-efficient
partnerships, and• provided seamlessly to users in a supportive
policy environment
Distributed Applications, Data, Services
CGDI will enable distributed CGDI will enable distributed applications, applications,
CGDICGDI
.
Applications
Applications
Applications
Applications
Data
Data
Data
Data
Services
Services
Services
Services
Data and Services
Global ParticipationCGDI will join with other National SDIs to form a global SDICGDI will join with other National SDIs to form a global SDI
CGDICGDIU.S.NSDI
AustralianSDI
GlobalGlobalSDISDI
EuropeanGII
OtherSDI
Canadian information providers will have access to global marketsCanadian information providers will have access to global markets
.
CGDI Endorsed Services and Specifications
• Geodata Discovery Service(OGC Catalogue service, Z39.50 profile)
• ISO Metadata Standard(ISO 19115 DIS)
• Web Map Service(OGC WMS)
• Web Feature Service(OGC WFS)
• Geographic Markup Language(OGC GML)
From plans to reality
• From Architecture to Infrastructure– http://www.geoconnections.org/architecture– Cgdi-dev.geoconnections.org
• WMS, WFS, WCS, GML Tools, Registries
– Operational Implementations• Discovery• Map Servers
Architecture
Pre-operational implementations
Operational Infrastructure
GISD Initial Capability Pilot
(GISD-ICP)
Open GIS Consortium, Inc.
Sponsors and OGC Partners• Sponsors
– US Department of State– US Agency for International Development– US Federal Geographic Data Committee– Natural Resources Canada
• Partners– Advanced Technology Solutions (USA)– CubeWerx, Inc. (Canada)– ESRI (USA)– Federal Graphic Data Committee (USA)– Intergraph (USA)– Ionic Software (Belgium)– Laser Scan, Inc. (USA)
Goals
• Further the value of GI to SD by building / improving an interoperable infrastructure framework on the African continent– Form a public and private partnership to focus
both sectors on the issues– Create a working, expandable system based on
Standards Based Commercial Off the Shelf Software (SCOTS)
Method
• Engage the Open GIS Consortium, Inc. (OGC), to rally its 230 members of the industry around the cause– OGC is not-for-profit industry trade association
• Build a framework of existing data resources and enable the real-time sharing and use of those data– Uses “interfaces” designed by OGC– Uses “software” from industry, government,
shareware, open source worlds
Before OGC Interfaces
With OGC Interfaces
Seconds to Minutes,insteadof days
Up to datedata
Get exactly what you want, not an entire continent
Vendorneutral
Formatneutral
Our Phase One
AfricanPartners:
More to come in
the future
Multiviewer/Gateway
• Support for javascript in all browsers must be verified
• Proper processing of OGC Map requests needs to be assured
• Soon to disseminate guidance to Catalog (metadata providers) on how to set up their map services and proper metadata link contents
OS MasterMap™ provides...
• A seamless database reflecting the real world, with polygons representing man-made and natural features.
• Improved attribution, for more versatile classification of features, more intelligent data and better analysis.
• An on-line selection, quotation and delivery service to supply your data faster and more efficiently.
• Topographic Identifiers (TOIDs) to attach data which can be exchanged and shared between government departments and businesses.
Inte
llig
en
t Intelligent data ...
Topo96 Landline OS MasterMap Topo.Data restructureQuality improvementSpatial indexing
•Database of over 400 million unique topographic objects
Inte
llig
en
t Themes
Land
Buildings
Roads, tracks and paths
Rail
Structures
Water
Admin. Boundaries
Terrain and height
Heritage and antiquites
Defin
itiv
eObject attributes ...
Seamless
Acc
ess
ible
Acc
ess
ibleOS MasterMap™ first release
Acc
ess
ibleOS MasterMap™ & GML
• Supply format - GMLv2 only
• “Chunked” into managable file sizes
• Compressed using gzip
• Initial data supply via FTP or DVD
• Change only update via FTP only
Recommendations
Where to play• Stay involved via liaison to Standards
Australia and to ISO. If you have expertise, contribute it!
• Contribute your problems and experience to the OGC spec process where you can
• Establish multi-participant, multi-problem pilot projects to test integration of specs as a first step in defining a Reference Model
• Organize your community
Data Content Standards
• Specify semantics and syntax for information exchange for a specific theme of data
• May define core or comprehensive “packaging” of spatial data
• May be expressed as an ISO Application Schema
• Supports usage in OGC interfaces
Interoperability based on a common data model for data exchange
MissionSystem 1
MissionSystem 3
MissionSystem 2
APIexport
import
API
export
import
API
CoreFrameworkEncoding
CommonContentModel
Common Elements
• Feature types (classes) included• Unique feature identifier system• Basic attributes• Controlled vocabulary, codes,
authorities• Valid at a range of scales and
resolutions• Multiple representations of same
features possible
Establish WFS on agreed content nationwide
MissionSystem AWeb Feature
Browser/Client Application
MissionSystem B
Native FormatGML
(XML)
WFS
WFS
translationutilities
BprivateschemaPpublic
schematransformation
rules
Geographic Location Gazetteer
• Names of geographic places should be identifiable with unique IDs for easy reference and usage– First-order Subdivision (Province)– Second-order Subdivision (District)– Populated places– Named landscape features
• Establishment of online gazetteer by each nation is a useful service
Geographic Name Resolution (OGC Gazetteer Profile of WFS)• Online service protocol is being
developed to query geographic name servers to assist in relevant place name and coordinate assignment
• Metadata collection (cataloguing) can benefit from access to Web service to encode place as name and coordinates
• Geospatial search will benefit from stronger match of place to coordinates
Gazetteer Interaction
Web-basedapplicationWeb-basedapplication
User
Place Name and Context
Request may include ambiguous place type and name or coordinate
Structure
Response should include context but must include spatial coordinates
Gazetteer Service
Geodetic Reference Systems
• Selecting and conforming to a national or trans-national horizontal and vertical datum
• Many new systems consistent with geoid-based solutions (useful with GPS)
• Ability to also report data in geographic (latitude, longitude, decimal degrees) helpful in regional-global analysis
Feature Type Catalogs
• Development of national online catalog for “well-known” classes of features and attributes:– Definition– Authority– Relationships
• ISO has feature cataloguing methodology to assist in solution
National Information Profiles of International Standards
• ISO standards are typically adopted by national members as National Profiles
• Profiles permit clarification, localization, and extension of ISO content
• Coordination or common adoption of multi-national profiles is desirable
Examples of Profiles
• Metadata
• Feature Catalogue
• Application Schemas
Data Access Policies and Laws
• Review existing Information Technology legislation and policies
• Establish data exchange policies
• Address privacy, intellectual property, and security issues
• Define terms of participation in national SDI environment
Australian Advantages• Small community in which most players know
each other (and all States can sit around a table and engage with New Zealand!)
• Technically advanced geospatial IT sector with early adopters/implementers of OGC technology
• “No worries” spirit in consensus-building
Thank you so much for the opportunity to visit and share these ideas!
Standards in Australia
Status and overview of current SDI related activities
Examples • ICSM’s Harmonised Data Model (Integratability) currently includes:
– Cadastre– Topographic– Place names– Street address
• Can have new themes, classes and attributes added to it over time;• The “Client” is PSMA who are operationalising the HDM;• HDM uses the following ISO standards:
– 19103 Conceptual schema language– 19107 Spatial schema– 19108 Temporal schema– 19109 Rules for application schema
• Will have 19110 (Feature Cataloguing methodology) added; • ACT Urban Services and PSMA = reference implementations
Examples
• (Draft) ANZLIC Metadata Profile (based on ISO 19115 Metadata)
• Provides a recommended minimum set for the majority of spatial projects
• Comments on the draft are currently being reviewed
Examples ASDD (based on OGC Catalog Services
Version 1.0 and 1.1 and ISO 23950 "Information Retrieval” Z39.50)
Examples Encoding standard ISO 19118 (Encoding)
and GML 3 (GML 3 already ISO compliant) are being integrated
Examples Registries. ISO 19135 (Procedures for
registration of geographical information items). Looking at semantics, terminology and spatial schema. Should be at DIS by mid 2003. Andrew Jones on the WG
Conclusions
• Standards are only useful if they reduce work, increase consistency and enable easier sharing of information over the medium – long term.
• There may be some short-term “pain” to implement them (ie. change from existing approaches), but it should be in everyone’s benefit in the longer term to move towards adoption.
Conclusions
• By getting involved with the specification and standards setting agendas (both internationally and at home), agencies can influence what specifications and standards are worked up to formal release and adoption stages – also provides early warning radar in order to allow agencies to prepare for change.
Conclusions
• Standards ideally need to be considered within an over-arching framework (such as a national SDI or a B2B web services model) rather than as stand-alone abstract items.
Conclusions
• The work of ISO, OGC and WWWC in particular is very closely dovetailed together and groups such as FGDC, ANZLIC, ICSM, Standards Australia/NZ, NOIE etc. are there to help promulgate the standards and encourage reference implementations to be developed.
Conclusions
• The meshing together of supporting standards allows new paradigms to be operationalised, such as interoperability, location-based services, download and real-time views from remote sensors etc.
Conclusions
• Standards/ specifications need to be developed through operational testbeds and pilots to retain real-world relevance and applications;
Conclusions
• Adopted standards need to be reinforced by minimum barrier to entry reference implementations (an FGDC approach).
Conclusions
• Australia is in a strong situation to be earlier adopters of the new ISO 191** and OGC suite of standards through our existing jurisdictional coordination mechanisms and government industry partnerships - close links between ASIBA and ANZLIC/ ICSM/ PSMA etc.
Conclusions
• Standards really only become mainstream when COTS products are developed by the vendors in their commercial products and we need to work with the vendors to ensure such products become increasingly available.
Conclusions
• The ASDI Distribution Network can be delivered through a standards-based approach after a collective agreement on what standards underpin the functionality required.
Thanks go to:
600
400 Map Pane
Map controls
• counties• quadrangles• watersheds• user-defined polygon
SelectedFeature list
Capture PlacesCapture Places ClearClear
OGC WMS
• Identities/URLs of OGC WMS and WFS set as applet arguments• Coordinate system assumed to be EPSG:4326 (geo decimal degrees)• Output as structured variables for use in other programs• Styling of GML at programmer’s discretion• Returned feature structures include ID, name, and geometry
OGC WFS
FeatureStructures