Skip to main content

Preserving Detail in a Combined Land Use Ontology

  • Conference paper
Geographic Information Science (GIScience 2012)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 7478))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Resolving land use codes between jurisdictions has been an on-going problem due to differences in terms and the nuances of partial similarity of concepts. This paper reports on creating a land use ontology that, contrary to being limited to the highest level of codes or to the most-often used codes, retains all codes. It is also novel in that it records the more subtle relationships between codes rather than just using subclassing. The purpose of creating this comprehensive type of ontology is to provide precise answers to searches of heterogeneous land use codes across jurisdictions. Land use affects important planning decisions, and detail is critical. To query the ontology, custom Java code was written, rather than using SPARQL, to be able to traverse down or up the tree to find the closest matching code when an exact match does not occur.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahlqvist, O.: Land Cover/use Legend Harmonization, IIASA 2011 (2011), http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/FOR/lc/presentations/Ahlqvist_IIASA.pdf

  2. Ahlqvist, O., Shortridge, A.: Spatial and Semantic Dimensions of Landscape Heterogeneity. Landscape Ecol. 25, 573–590 (2010), http://www.springerlink.com/content/41076746pu50n054/fulltext.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. American Planning Association, Land Based Classification Standards (LBCS), http://www.planning.org/lbcs/background

  4. Cruz, I.F., Sunna, W., Ayloo, K.: Concept Level Matching of Geospatial Ontologies. In: GIS Planet Second Conference and Exhibition on Geographic Information, Estoril, Portugal (June 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cruz, I.F., Stroe, C., Caimi, F., Fabiani, A., Pesquita, C., Couto, F., Palmonari: Using AgreementMaker to Align Ontologies for OAEI 2011 (2011), http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-814/oaei11_paper1.pdf

  6. CUAHSI, http://www.cuahsi.org

  7. Cyganiak, R., Jentzsch, A.: Linking Open Data Cloud, http://lod-cloud.net/

  8. Gahegan, M., Smart, W., Masoud-Ansari, S., Whitehead, B.: A Semantic Web Map Mediation Service: Interactive Redesign and Sharing of Map Legends. In: Spatial Semantics and Ontology Workshop (SSO 2011) at ACM SIGSPATIAL, Chicago, IL, November 1 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. GeoSPARQL, http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/80 , http://geosparql.org

  10. ICAN, International Coastal Atlas Network, Ontology Development, http://ican.science.oregonstate.edu/node/571

  11. iPlant, http://www.iplantcollaborative.org/discover/semantic-web/semantic-web-overview

  12. Knoodl, Distributed Information Management System, http://knoodl.com

  13. National Land Parcel Data, A Vision for the Future. National Academies Press, http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11978

  14. Naughton, J., DeWitt, D., Maier, D., et al.: others: The Niagara Internet Query System. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 24(2), 27–33 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/

  16. Pouchard, L., Cook, R., Green, J., Palanisamy, G., Noy, N.: Semantic Technologies Improving the Recall and Precision of the Mercury Metadata Search Engine. AGU Fall Meeting (2011), http://m.core-apps.com/agu2011/abstract/ed111cea5ff27cc0c5786310e9462efc

  17. Prompt (Protégé plugin), http://protege.stanford.edu/plugins/prompt/prompt.html

  18. SKOS, http://www.w3.org/2009/08/skos-reference/skos.html

  19. SPARQL Query Language for RDF, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/

  20. Sunna, W., Cruz, I.F.: Using the AgreementMaker to Align Ontologies for the OAWI Campaign 2007. In: Second ISWC International Workshop on Ontology Matching. CEUR-WS (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wiegand, N.: A Geospatial Semantic Web Scenario. Technical Report, University of Wisconsin-Madison (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wiegand, N., Zhou, N.: Ontology-Based Geospatial Web Query System. In: Agouris, P., Croitoru, A. (eds.) Next Generation Geospatial Information: From Digital Image Analysis to Spatio-Temporal Databases. ISPRS Book series, pp. 157–168. Taylor & Francis, Balkema (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wiegand, N. (2012). Preserving Detail in a Combined Land Use Ontology. In: Xiao, N., Kwan, MP., Goodchild, M.F., Shekhar, S. (eds) Geographic Information Science. GIScience 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7478. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33024-7_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33024-7_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33023-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33024-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics