Advertisement

A Data Model for Multi-scale Topographical Data

  • J.E. Stoter
  • J.M. Morales
  • R.L.G. Lemmens
  • B.M. Meijers
  • P.J.M van Oosterom
  • C.W. Quak
  • H.T. Uitermark
  • L. van den Brink
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

The lack of fully automated generalisation forces National Mapping Agencies to maintain topographical data sets at different map scales. For consistency between map scales, but also for supporting (future) automated generalisation processes, information on similarities and differences of the separate data sets should be identified and formalised. This includes information on valid data content at the different scales (‘scale state’), but as important is the semantics of multi-scale and generalisation aspects (‘scale event’). As ‘scale state’ and ‘scale event’ are strongly related (‘different sides of the same coin’) it is important to integrate these in a single model. This paper presents a semantically-rich data model for an integrated topographical database, facilitating (semi-)automated generalisation. UML (including OCL) is used to formalise the model. The scope of the model is outlined and the model is presented based on an analysis of several alternatives for modelling multi-scale and generalisation aspects. The model is evaluated by instantiating the model and applying it to test data.

Keywords

multi-scale spatial data modelling generalisation knowledge formalisation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bédard Y, Larrivée S, Proulx M-J, and Nadeau M (2004) Modelling geospatial databases with plug-ins for visual languages: a pragmatic approach and the impacts of 16 years of research and experimentations on Perceptory. LNCS 3289. Springer, Berlin, pp 17–30.Google Scholar
  2. Buttenfield BP, and Delotto JS (1989) Multiple representations. National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA). Scientific Report for the Specialist Meeting, Technical paper 89–3, 87p.Google Scholar
  3. Devogele T, Trevisan J, and Raynal L (1996) Building a multi-scale database with scale transition relationships. In: International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, pp 337–351.Google Scholar
  4. Enterprise Architect (2008) http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/, accessed on 22–Jan–2008.Google Scholar
  5. Friis-Christensen A and Jensen CS (2003) Object-relational management of multiply represented geographic entities. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Scientific and Statistical Database Management. Cambridge, MA, USA, July 9–11, pp 183–192.Google Scholar
  6. Hespanha J, van Bennekom-Minnema J, van Oosterom PJM, and Lemmen C (2008) The MDA approach applied to the Land Administration Domain Model with focus on constrains specified OCL. Proceedings of FIG Working Week, 14–19 June, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  7. Jones CB, Kidner DB, Luo LQ, Bundy GL, Ware JM (1996) Database design for a multi-scale spatial information system. In: IJGIS, vol 10, 8, pp 901–920.Google Scholar
  8. Kadaster (2002) Specificaties TOPxxvector (Specifications TOPxxvector). Topografische Dienst, Emmen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  9. Kadaster (2006) Generalisatievoorschriften TOP50vector (Generalisation regulations TOP50vector) Topografische Dienst, Emmen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  10. Kilpelainen T (1997) Multiple representation and generalisation of geo-databases for topographic maps. PhD thesis, Finnish Geodetic Institute.Google Scholar
  11. Lemmen CHJ, and van Oosterom PJM (2006) Version 1.0 of the FIG Core Cadastral Domain Model. XXIII International FIG congress, October, Munich, 18p.Google Scholar
  12. Louwsma JS, Zlatanova S, Lammeren R, and van Oosterom PJM (2006) Specifying and implementing constraints in GIS – with examples from a geo-virtual reality system. In: GeoInformatica, vol 10, 4, pp 531–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Molenaar M (1989) Single valued vector maps: a concept in Geographic Information Systems. Geo-Informationssysteme, vol 2, 1, pp 18–26.Google Scholar
  14. NCGIA, 1989, The research plan of the National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis. In: Int. J. Geographical Information Systems, vol 3, 2, pp 117–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Oosterom PJM van (2005) Variable-scale topological data structures suitable for progres-sive data transfer: the GAPface tree and GAP-edge forest. In: Cartography and Geographic Information Science, vol 32, 4, pp 331–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Oosterom PJM van (2006) Constraints in spatial data models, in a dynamic context. In: Drummond J, Billen R, João E, and Forrest D (eds). Dynamic and Mobile GIS: Investigating Changes in Space and Time, pp 104–137.Google Scholar
  17. Oosterom PJM van, de Vries M, and Meijers M (2006) Vario-scale data server in a web service context. Workshop ICA Commission on Map Generalisation and Multiple Representation, June, Vancouver, 14p.Google Scholar
  18. Parent C, Spaccapietra S, and Zimányi E (2006) Conceptual modelling for traditional and spatio-temporal applications. The MADS approach. ISBN: 3–540–30153–4.Google Scholar
  19. Sparks G (2001) Database modelling in UML. Sparx Systems whitepaper.Google Scholar
  20. Stoter JE, Quak CW, van Oosterom PJM, Meijers BM, Lemmens RLG, and Uitermark HT (2007) Considerations for the design of a semantic data model for a multi-representation topographical database. In: H. Kremers (ed), Lecture notes in information sciences. Berlin: CODATA, pp 53–71.Google Scholar
  21. West-Nielsen P, and Meyer M (2007) Automated generalisation in a map production environment – the KMS experience. In: Mackaness WA, Ruas A, and Sarjakoski LT (eds). Generalisation of geographic information: cartographic modelling and applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • J.E. Stoter
    • 1
  • J.M. Morales
    • 1
  • R.L.G. Lemmens
    • 1
  • B.M. Meijers
    • 2
  • P.J.M van Oosterom
    • 2
  • C.W. Quak
    • 2
  • H.T. Uitermark
    • 3
  • L. van den Brink
    • 4
  1. 1.ITC7500 AA EnschedeThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Delft University of TechnologyThe Netherlands
  3. 3.KadasterThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Dynasol BVBuffelstraat 124aThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations