Validating a 3D topological structure of a 3D space partition
The goal of this research is to develop a 3D topological structure to represent a 3D space partition with validation functionality and support for conversions from topological to geometrical primitives. Several 3D topological structures have been presented in the past, mainly by researchers. The technical (implementation) model developed in this paper is based on the conceptual model of the ISO 19107 ‘spatial schema’ standard and consists of four topological primitives: node, edge, face, and volume, which are related to each other via their (co)boundary relationships. In our setting, only linear primitives (no curves) are supported and no isolated and dangling primitives are allowed. In our model, the rings, the shells, and the orientation play key roles within the topological structure and the functions that implement the geometrical realization.
There was no formal definition of a valid 3D topological structure available and this paper presents such a definition, which is the main novel contribution. This definition is presented in three levels, where at every next level the definition is further refined such that finally a set of rules is proposed, which can be implemented unambiguously. In order to validate a 3D topological structure, the involved volumes must be valid as well as the whole structure, which means the relationships between the volumes. The rules for a valid structure have been implemented on top of Oracle Spatial and tested with artificial and real-world test data.
KeywordsTopological Structure Outer Ring Space Partition Validation Function Validation Rule
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Arnold, S., 2009. Digital Landscape Model DLM-DE – Deriving Land Cover Information by Integration of Topographic Reference Data with Remote Sensing Data. in: Proceedings of the ISPRS Workshop on High-Resolution Earth Imaging for Geospatial Information, Hannover.Google Scholar
- Bossard, M., Feranec, J. & Otahel, J., 2000. EEA CORINE Land Cover Technical Guide – Addendum 2000. – Technical Report No. 40, Kopenhagen.Google Scholar
- Büttner, G., Feranec, G. & Jaffrain, G., 2006. EEA CORINE Land Cover Nomenclature Illustrated Guide – Addendum 2006. – European Environment Agency.Google Scholar
- Douglas, D. & Peucker, T., 1973. Algorithms for the reduction of the number of points required to represent a digitized line or its caricature. The Canadian Cartographer 10 (1973) pp. 112–122.Google Scholar
- Haunert, J.-H., 2008. Aggregation in Map Generalization by Combinatorial Optimization, Vol. Heft 626 of Reihe C, Deutsche Geodätische Kommission, München.Google Scholar
- Haunert, J.-H. & Sester, M., 2008. Area collapse and road centerlines based on straight skeletons. in: GeoInformatica, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 169–191, 2008.Google Scholar
- Heinzle, F. & Anders, K.-H., 2007. Characterising Space via Pattern Recognition Techniques: Identifying Patterns in Road Networks, in: W. Mackaness, A. Ruas & L.T. Sarjakoski, eds, Generalization of geographic information: cartographic modelling and applications, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 233–253.Google Scholar
- Jansen, L.J.M. Jansen, G. Groom, G. Carraic, 2008: Land-cover harmonisation and semantic similarity: some methodological issues. Journal of Land Use Science, Vol. 3, No. 2–3, June–September 2008, 131–160.Google Scholar
- Kavouras, M. & M. Kokla, 2008. Semantic Integration of Heterogeneous Geospatial Information. In: Advances in Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences 2008 ISPRS Congress Book, Li, Ζ., Chen, J., and Baltsavias, E. (Eds.), CRC Press/Balkema, London, UK, 2008.Google Scholar
- Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D. Jr., & Vecchi, M. P., 1983. Optimization by Simulated Annealing. in: Science 220 (4598), 671. 13 May 1983.Google Scholar
- Lillesand, T. M. & Kiefer, R. W., 1999. Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation, 4th edn, John Wiley &\& Sons.Google Scholar
- Liu, Y.L., Jiao, L.M., Liu, Y.F.: Land Use Data Generalization Indices Based on Scale and Landscape Pattern. in: Proceedings of the Joint International Conference on Theory, Data Handling and Modelling in GeoSpatial Information Science, vol. 38, no. 2, 2010Google Scholar
- Mackaness, W., A., Ruas, A. & Sarjakoski, L.T., 2007. Generalisation of Geographic Information - Cartographic Modelling and Applications, Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
- Pondrenk. M, 2002. Aufbau des DLM50 aus dem Basis-DLM und Ableitung der DTK50 – Lösungsansatz in Niedersachsen. in: Kartographische Schriften, Band 6, Kartographie als Baustein moderner Kommunikation, pp.126-130, Bonn.Google Scholar
- van Oosterom, P., 1995. The GAP-tree, an approach to 'on-the-fly' map generalization of an area partitioning. in: J.-C. Müller, J.-P. Lagrange & R. Weibel, eds, GIS and Generalization - Methodology and Practice, Taylor & Francis,Google Scholar
- pp. 120–132.Google Scholar