Advertisement

Topological querying of multiple map layers

  • Sylvia de Hoop
  • Peter van Oosterom
  • Martien Molenaar
Query Languages
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 716)

Abstract

This paper first recaptures why multiple map layers are required in Geographic Information Systems. The two main motivations are: flexibility in data modeling, and efficient processing of data. In order to make the map layer discussions clearer, we introduce two different types of map layers: a structure layer, and a thematic layer. Though the concept of a structure layer is defined in a general sense, to illustrate its practicability the organization of data in a structure layer is initially represented according to the formal data structure for single-valued vector maps as proposed by Molenaar. In order to develop a data model for a multi-layered system, the concept of structure layers, specified for the fds, is extended for multi-valued vector maps. It turns out that the data can be modeled in various ways. After that the topic of topological querying of multiple map layers is introduced with a few examples. Map overlay plays a central role in this process. But map overlay is a computationally expensive operation, and therefore several alternative optimization techniques are described for answering the queries efficiently. An important goal of the described multiple map layer query language is that it is a realistic approach. That is, the resulting implementation can be used in an interactive environment with real data sets: with at least several megabytes of geographic data. This is reflected by the case study presented in this paper.

Keywords

Structure Layer Thematic Layer Area Feature Topological Data Intersection Node 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Vermessungsverwaltungen der Länder der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (AdV). Amtliches Topographic-Kartographisches Informationssystem (ATKIS), 1988. (in German).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stan Aronoff. Geographic Information Systems: A Management Perspective. WDL Publications, Ottawa, Canada, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Bennis, B. David, I. Morize-Quilio, J.M. Thévenin, and Y. Viémont. GéoGraph: A topological storage model for extensible GIS. In Auto-Carto 10, Baltimore, pages 349–367, March 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Bennis, B. David, I. Quilio, and Y. Viémont. GéoTropics database support alternatives for geographic applications. In 4th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Zürich, Switzerland, pages 599–610, July 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nicholas R. Chrisman. Epsilon filtering — a technique for automated scale changing. In Technical Papers of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, pages 322–331, March 1983.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ian K. Crain. Extremely Large Spatial Information Systems a Quantitative Perspective. In 4th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Zürich, Switzerland, pages 632–641, July 1990.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benoît David. Personnel communication through email on the topic: Map layers, June 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benoît David and Yann Viemont. Data structure alternatives for very large spatial databases. Technical Report ?, Institut Géographique National — France, 1991.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sylvia de Hoop and Peter van Oosterom. The storage and manipulation of topology in Postgres. In EGIS'92, Munich, Germany, pages 1324–1336, March 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    DGIWG. DIGEST — digital geographic information — exchange standards — edition 1.1. Technical report, Defence Mapping Agency, USA, Digital Geographic Information Working Group, October 1992.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Claus Dorenbeck and Max J. Egenhofer. Algebraic optimization of combined overlay operations. In Auto-Carto 10, Baltimore, pages 296–312, March 1991.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    James Dougenik. Whirlpool: A geometric processor for polygon coverage data. In Robert T. Aagenburg, editor, Auto-Carto IV, Volume II, November 1979.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Andrew U. Frank. Overlay processing in spatial information systems. In Auto-Carto 8, pages 16–31, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wm. Randolph Franklin and Peter Y.F. Wu. A polygon overlay system in PRO-LOG. In Auto-Carto 8, pages 97–106, 1987.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stephen C. Guptill and Robin G. Fegeas. Feature based spatial data models — The choice for global databases in the 1990's. In Helen Mounsey and Roger Tomlinson, editors, Building Databases for Global Science, pages 279–295. Taylor & Francis, 1988.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hans-Peter Kriegel, Thomas Brinkhoff, and Ralf Schneider. The combination of spatial access methods and computational geometry in geographic database systems. In Advances in Spatial Databases, 2nd Symposium, SSD'91, Zürich, Switzerland, pages 3–21, August 1991.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Werner Kuhn. Are Displays Maps or Views? In Auto-Carto 10, Baltimore, pages 261–274, March 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martien Molenaar. Single valued vector maps — A concept in Geographic Information Systems. Geo-Informationssysteme, 2(1):18–26, 1989.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martien Molenaar. Informatie theoretische aspecten van GIS. In Vastgoedinformatie in de jaren negentig, pages 67–80, June 1990. (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martien Molenaar. Object-hierarchies. Why is data standardisation so difficult? In Kockelhoren et al., editor, Kadaster in Perspectief, pages 73–86. Dienst van het Kadaster en de Openbare Registers, Apeldoorn, 1991.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Donna J. Peuquet. A conceptual framework and comparison of spatial data models. Cartographica, 21(4):66–113, 1984.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Simon Pigot. Topological Models for 3D Spatial Information Systems. In Auto-Carto 10, Baltimore, pages 368–392, 1991.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Michael Stonebraker, Lawrence A. Rowe, and Michael Hirohama. The implementation of Postgres. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2(1):125–142, March 1990.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jan W. van Roessel. Attribute propagation and line segment classification in planesweep overlay. In 4th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Zürich, pages 127–140, Columbus, OH, July 1990. International Geographical Union IGU.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guangyu Zhang and John Tulip. An algorithm for the avoidance of sliver polygons and clusters of points in spatial overlays. In 4th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Zürich, Switzerland, pages 141–150, July 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvia de Hoop
    • 1
  • Peter van Oosterom
    • 2
  • Martien Molenaar
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Geographic Information ProcessingWageningen Agricultural UniversityAH WageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.TNO Physics and Electronics LaboratoryJG The HagueThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations