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

Laxton, John L jll at bgs.ac.uk
Thu Sep 30 05:57:40 EDT 2010


Hi Alistair,

Yes I think naming the type properties gsmltv:geologicUnitType etc would be clearer.

John

From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Alistair Ritchie
Sent: 27 September 2010 03:53
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [auscope-geosciml] GeoSciML Thematic View schema - call for feedback

Hi John

I'll add a type_uri (or faultType_uri, see below) property (point 1.) to the ShearDisplacementStructure type and update the documentation (the notes column) to refelct the current majority consensus (2 of 2 repsonses) for point 3.

For point 2: the GeologicUnit gsmltv:type property is holding the unit type information as a label. Values like 'lithodemic unit' are expected here.

Would it be clearer if the names of the gsmltv:type property was changed across all the feature types to gsmltv:geologicUnitType, gsmltv:contactType,  gsmltv:faultType? If thematic mapping of a type is required then then there will be corresponding gsmltv:geologicUnitType_uri, gsmltv:contactType_uri or  gsmltv:faultType_uri properties.

Cheers
Alistair

Alistair Ritchie
GEOSCIENCE VICTORIA | EARTH RESOURCES DIVISION
Department of Primary Industries | Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Tel: +61 3 9658 4512 | Fax: +61 3 9658 4555

On 23 September 2010 19:58, Laxton, John L <jll at bgs.ac.uk<mailto:jll at bgs.ac.uk>> wrote:
Hi Alistair,

A couple of comments on this as requested:


1.      I think we need a faultType thematic map class in the ShearDisplacementStructure view

2.      I think in the GeologicUnit view gsmltv:type would be better named gsmltv:title as that it what it is as I understand it – it isn’t really holding information on the type of GeologicUnit

3.      I agree that gsmltv:identifier should be unique to the thematic view – areas are likely to be combined in thematic views so won’t necessarily relate directly to the originating MappedFeatures.

Could you clarify what you mean when you say this is not for setting up a simple GeoSciML WFS? Surely it is for setting up a simple WFS amongst other things.

John

From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au<mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au> [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au<mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au>] On Behalf Of Alistair Ritchie
Sent: 15 September 2010 02:43
To: AuScope-GeoSciML
Subject: [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

--
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.

_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au<mailto: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/20100930/59503bb0/attachment.htm>


More information about the GeoSciML mailing list