[auscope-geosciml] GeoSciML Thematic View schema - call for feedback

Stephen M Richard steve.richard at azgs.az.gov
Wed Sep 15 10:57:20 EDT 2010


  Agnes--
here's some examples of a structured approach to the text strings that 
might be used in a flat file format to summarize the lithology and 
geologic history
steve

LITHOLOGY COMPOSITION (Text) -- Composition of the mapped unit in terms 
of rock types from the standard lithology vocabulary, along with a 
proportion value for each constituent. Encoded as a set of 
{lithology:proportion} tuples. Rock types will be specified with 
preferred names from a CGI lithology vocabulary. Proportion values will 
also be specified from a controlled vocabulary, and definition for these 
terms will be accessible through the same mechanism as the lithology 
vocabulary. The format will be "Lith1:prop1;Lith2:prop2". The lithology 
vocabulary includes some hierarchy, and the lithology terms could encode 
the hierarchy from most general to most specific (granitic 
rock/granodiorite). The first lithology listed will be considered the 
most abundant and used for symbolization in a lithology map portrayal.


GEOLOGIC History (Text) -- Text string for geologic age of event(s) in 
genesis of unit. Specified as "Age(NNN.N)[?][-Age(NNN.N)[?]]:Event" 
tuples, with multiple values separated by semicolons. If two age values 
are included, separated by a hyphen, for an event, the event occurred 
during an age range. Older age bound of range is listed first. If a 
numeric age is known, it should be added after the corresponding 
stratigraphic age term in parenthesis. Numeric age values are in 
millions of years before 1950 (Ma). Hierarchy of stratigraphic ages is 
indicated from most general to most specific, with the named eras 
separated by '/'. To reduce the likelihood of the age string exceeding 
255 characters and being truncated in shapefiles, stratigraphic era 
names do not need to be repeated if they have already been used. The 
confidence term is optional, defaulting to 'std', indicating that the 
age is considered reliable with a _st_andar_d_ level of confidence. 
Other values allowed are 'low', used to indicate that the associated age 
assignment is uncertain, and 'unk' to indicate unknown reliability. 
Examples: "Phanerozoic/Mesozoic/Jurassic-Cretaceous:Deposition", 
"Phanerozoic/­Cenozoic/­Neogene/­Miocene(12.5):Eruption", 
"Precambrian/­Proterozoic/­Paleo­protero­zoic­(1750):­Eruption; 
Mesoproterozoic(1420):Intrusion; 
Phanerozoic/­Mesozoic/­Jurassic­(165):­Intrusion; 
Cenozoic/­Paleogene/Eocene?-Neogene/Miocene:Metamorphism; Miocene:­Cooling".



On 9/15/2010 12:52 AM, Tellez-Arenas Agnes wrote:
> Hi,
> A first question.
> I understand that gsmltv:geologicHistory (concat value YES) 
> represents several attributes that are concatenated.
> But what if there are several geologicHistory?
> For gsmltv:lithology, I guess that if there are several 
> compositionPart, all the lithologies are concatenated, without role 
> and proportion?
> Thanks for this work!
> Best regards
> Agnès
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *De :* auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au 
> [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] *De la part de* 
> Alistair Ritchie
> *Envoyé :* mercredi 15 septembre 2010 03:43
> *À :* AuScope-GeoSciML
> *Objet :* [auscope-geosciml] GeoSciML Thematic View schema - call for 
> feedback
>
> *BACKGROUND*
>
> The lack of a thematic map or portrayal model that could be easily 
> deployed in the current generation of web map services (be they OGC or 
> Google or ... ? ... services) has long been recognised as a problem in 
> GeoSciML. At the Rome IWG meeting the group moved to develop a schema 
> that defined GeoSciML compatible map layers for simple map services 
> (meeting note 
> <https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/RomeF2FModelDesignMeetingNotes#14_Portrayal_classes_in_GeoSciML>, 
> TWiki overview 
> <https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/GeoSciMLThematicView>). 
> Broadly speaking the intent is to promote:
>
>    1. a consistent interface to web map data;
>    2. the widespread us of controlled vocabularies in thematic mapping;
>    3. the ability to share thematic mapping tools such as SLDs between
>       map services and clients to allow simple map query and display
>       use cases ('show me all units coloured by their lithology', '
>       show me all units that contain sandstone');
>    4. provide a very simple entry level to the GeoSciML world,
>       introducing the concepts of mapping to community defined
>       vocabularies and understanding the full GeoSciML model.
>
> The primary result of this work will be a GML application schema that 
> conforms to level 0 of the Simple Features Profile for GML (SF). It is 
> a denormalised /view/ of GeoSciML that corresponds to a GIS layer (one 
> record per geometry) and can be used for portrayal and thematic 
> mapping purposes.
>
> While it has been harmonized with GeoSciML (consistent naming 
> conventions, broad mapping of properties) it is a schema in it own 
> right. It  not a SF level 0 profile of GeoSciML, is not intended as a 
> basis for setting up simple GeoSciML Web Feature Services, and is not 
> intended as a simple query interface to GeoSciML. It is solely for 
> representing geological features in simple map clients using simple 
> map services.
>
>
> *REQUEST FOR COMMENT*
>
> An initial skeleton of a model has been compiled based on existing WMS 
> layers (GeoScience Victoria and Arizona Geological Survey) and 
> feedback from participants at the Rome meeting. Tables summarising the 
> proposed layers have been posted here:
> https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/GeoSciMLThematicViewModelDiscussion
>
> We need feedback from a much broader group and invite interested 
> parties to comment on the model and suggest changes where necessary. 
> At the end of October a release candidate schema will be produced and 
> tested as part of Testbed 4.
>
> We look forward to your feedback.
>
> Thanks
>
> /Alistair Ritchie/
> *GEOSCIENCE VICTORIA* | EARTH RESOURCES DIVISION
> Department of Primary Industries | Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
> *Tel:* +61 3 9658 4512 | *Fax*: +61 3 9658 4555
>
> P* **Pensez à l'environnement avant d'imprimer ce message*
>
> */Think/**/ Environment before printing/*
>
> Le contenu de ce mél et de ses pièces jointes est destiné à l'usage 
> exclusif du (des) destinataire(s) désigné(s) comme tel(s).
>
> En cas de réception par erreur, le signaler à son expéditeur et ne pas 
> en divulguer le contenu.
> L'absence de virus a été vérifiée à l'émission, il convient néanmoins 
> de s'assurer de l'absence de contamination à sa réception.
>
> The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They 
> are intended for the named recipient(s) only.
>
> If you have received this email in error please notify the system 
> manager or  the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to
> anyone or make copies.
>
> eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> auscope-geosciml mailing list
> auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
> http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20100915/3b2d8678/attachment.htm>


More information about the GeoSciML mailing list