[GeoSciML] Borehole-Portrayal [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au
Tue Nov 6 17:24:16 EST 2012


IMHO uom is already logically part of the data model (part of Measure) - and the use of a separate attribute in the XML, or assumption of a constant value, is an encoding concern - noting that encodings may be lossy with respect to the model, so it's ok to lose per-value UoM option.

So, should probably lose it from the model anyway :).  In the water space we've been working through issues around data products needing to restrict content of such encoding artefacts. Looks like we'll need feature type catalogs with quite explicit information around how model elements are mapped to particular encodings :)

Rob Atkinson

From: geosciml-bounces+rob.atkinson=csiro.au at lists.opengeospatial.org [mailto:geosciml-bounces+rob.atkinson=csiro.au at lists.opengeospatial.org] On Behalf Of Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Sent: Wednesday, 7 November 2012 8:33 AM
To: geosciml at lists.opengeospatial.org
Subject: Re: [GeoSciML] Borehole-Portrayal [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Eric,

Personally, I tend to agree with you.  I did this to reflect the gdb model we came up with in Redlands, but I am ambivalent about their inclusion.  I'd be happy to drop the UOM fields if others agree.  It forces a provider to provide only one type of unit, but that is probably not a bad thing.

Cheers,
Ollie


________________________________
From: geosciml-bounces+oliver.raymond=ga.gov.au at lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:geosciml-bounces+oliver.raymond=ga.gov.au at lists.opengeospatial.org> [mailto:geosciml-bounces+oliver.raymond=ga.gov.au at lists.opengeospatial.org] On Behalf Of Boisvert, Eric
Sent: Tuesday, 6 November 2012 23:28
To: A mailing list for GeoSciML
Subject: Re: [GeoSciML] Borehole-Portrayal [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

having uom as a field is a real pain for users.  Every filter or SLD must take this into account because it implies there can be mixed uom.

this is annoying:

(boreholeLength > 10 AND boreholeLength_uom = 'm')
OR
(boreholeLength > 32.42 AND boreholeLength_uom = 'ft.')

it gets even worse when you need to combine with other uom because it becomes a n x m problem.

I know, provider will stick to a single unit. But if it does, why this field ? just document what uom is used somewhere else (like how you documented inclinationType) and keep them consistent (positionalAccuracy must be in meter if depth and elevation are in meter)

my two cents...





________________________________
De : geosciml-bounces+eric.boisvert=rncan-nrcan.gc.ca at lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:geosciml-bounces+eric.boisvert=rncan-nrcan.gc.ca at lists.opengeospatial.org> [mailto:geosciml-bounces+eric.boisvert=rncan-nrcan.gc.ca at lists.opengeospatial.org] De la part de Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au<mailto:Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au>
Envoyé : 5 novembre 2012 21:51
À : geosciml at lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:geosciml at lists.opengeospatial.org>
Objet : [GeoSciML] Borehole-Portrayal [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi all,

Geoscience Australia would like to try and formalize a Borehole simple feature WFS and WMS standard, similar to GeologicUnitView, ContactView, and ShearDisplacementStructureView in GeoSciML-Portrayal v2.

I have attached a proposed structure, based on the existing  xxxView classes and work done in the AuScope project and at ESRI earlier this year.

Comments please.

Cheers,
Ollie

__________________________________________________________________

Ollie Raymond
Senior Geologist  - Information Management  |  Continental Geology Section
Minerals and Natural Hazards Division  |  GEOSCIENCE AUSTRALIA

Oceania Councillor & Interoperability Working Group
IUGS Commission for the Management and Application of Geoscience Information
__________________________________________________________

Phone:  +61 2 6249 9575    Fax:  +61 2 6249 9971
Email:  Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au<mailto:Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au>    Web:  www.ga.gov.au<http://www.ga.gov.au/>
Cnr Jerrabomberra Avenue and Hindmarsh Drive   Symonston   ACT
GPO Box 378   Canberra   ACT   2601   Australia

Applying geoscience to Australia's most important challenges




Geoscience Australia Disclaimer: This e-mail (and files transmitted with it) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, then you have received this e-mail by mistake and any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail and its file attachments is prohibited. The security of emails transmitted cannot be guaranteed; by forwarding or replying to this email, you acknowledge and accept these risks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Geoscience Australia Disclaimer: This e-mail (and files transmitted with it) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, then you have received this e-mail by mistake and any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail and its file attachments is prohibited. The security of emails transmitted cannot be guaranteed; by forwarding or replying to this email, you acknowledge and accept these risks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20121107/c8dcc112/attachment.htm>


More information about the GeoSciML mailing list