- From: Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 10:23:28 +0000
- To: Byron Cochrane <bcochrane@linz.govt.nz>, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "jeremy.tandy@gmail.com" <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>, "frans.knibbe@geodan.nl" <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, "jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com" <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
- Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHrFjcm0HFfNi5e_GOa69b2Q0TLa2Gi6SD5pTcB+61QbiPU4tQ@mail.gmail.com>
Remember we are trying to illustrate best practice.. I think we are someway away from being able to do this here.. unless of course we can point to where data published using linear referencing is used by a community on the web ? Ed On Thu, 1 Sep 2016, 10:51 Byron Cochrane, <bcochrane@linz.govt.nz> wrote: > Yes I agree it is a common practice. That is why I suggested avoiding the > term "fringe case" to describe this. > > However, if you want to do spatial analysis or combine these data with > other data, the linear references need to be converted to x y z values in a > stated CRS. > > Perhaps this is the type of guidance we need? > > Cheers, > Byron > ________________________________________ > From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [Simon.Cox@csiro.au] > Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 7:56 PM > To: jeremy.tandy@gmail.com; frans.knibbe@geodan.nl; > jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com > Cc: eparsons@google.com; public-sdw-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: Request for help: BP 9 "How to describe relative positions" > > Or flightline, sounding, along a river, or even a walking tour … > Plotting multiple variables along a trajectory is very common in practice. > > From: Jeremy Tandy [mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2016 4:51 PM > To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; frans.knibbe@geodan.nl; > jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com > Cc: eparsons@google.com; public-sdw-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: Request for help: BP 9 "How to describe relative positions" > > @simon ... > > > But if you want to compare different properties along a linear feature, > it makes sense to use linear referencing > > for example, in a borehole? This is especially true where you can't > provide a geographic coordinate because you're not sure where the borehole > actually goes to any degree of accuracy. > > So ... > > I think that we're saying that LR should be avoided (by converting LR > measurements into more general coordinates) except in some special cases > where: > > 1) you want to describe sets of things along a linear element in a network > - such as in hydrology or samples from a borehole - and it is more > important to describe the relative positions of those things along the > linear element > > 2) you can't (or don't want to) express the location in geographic > coordinates to a satisfactory level of precision - for example, in a > geological survey that uses chainage (distance) between two points. > > In both of these cases, it seems sensible to describe the position using a > 1-dimensional CRS (or LRS). > > On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 at 23:55, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto: > Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> wrote: > > > … it’s a best practice not to use linear referencing … > … because it makes it difficult to combine with data that uses a > different CRS. > But if you want to compare different properties along a linear feature, it > makes sense to use linear referencing. > > From: Joshua Lieberman [mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com<mailto: > jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>] > Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2016 1:48 AM > To: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl<mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>> > Cc: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com<mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>>; > Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>; > Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com<mailto:eparsons@google.com>>; SDW WG > Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> > > Subject: Re: Request for help: BP 9 "How to describe relative positions" > > Well, my opinion is that it’s a best practice not to use linear > referencing, but that’s only my opinion, and I’ve been persuaded that a > spatial ontology should accommodate it. > > Josh > > On Aug 31, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl<mailto: > frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>> wrote: > > > > On 31 August 2016 at 15:19, Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com > <mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>> wrote: > Yes, but it’s a sort of derived CRS (LRS) that references one or two other > feature geometries (curve +/- origin point) in their own CRS, adding a unit > of measure. > > So you agree that there is no need to elaborate on LR in the BP if the > spatial ontology (new version of GeoSPARQL) that we are working on offers > sufficient hooks to work with LR? That would probably be a relief for the > BP editors. > > I think some recursiveness is hard to avoid in CRS defintions. Coordinate > systems are based on datums and datums are based on ellipsoids... > Eventually everything in the universe needs to be located in terms of some > arbitrary reference system. > > Regards, > Frans > > > There is another way of looking at linear reference measurements, which is > that they are observations made directly on a linear feature. In many > cases, it is a compact way of recording where some additional measurement > has been made, such as a water level, that eventually gets converted to a > linear reference point based on an LRS, and from there to an (x,y) point. > Both should be possible, depending on the usage. > > Josh > > > On Aug 31, 2016, at 8:54 AM, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl<mailto: > frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>> wrote: > > I wonder if Linear Referencing can be seen as a version of the mo > re general case of expression location in terms of a well defined CRS. For > 3D data, we use two numbers (latitude and longitude) to place a location on > a funnily shaped 3D geometry (a model of the surface of the Earth). In LR, > we use a single number to place locations on a funnily shaped 2D geometry > (e.g. a model of a road or a river). We can use topological relationships > to make assertions about those locations and to filter data: Is there an > essential difference between asking whether two polygons on Earth touch > each other or if two sections of road touch each other? > > Now if our spatial ontology allows the definition of any kind of CRS in > two or three dimensions, and clearly associating that CRS with geometry, > and the use of topological relationships, then it could very well be that > there is no need to make special arrangements for LR. > > I do think that organisations that naturally work with LR data, e.g. > organisations in the transportation sector, should be able to publish their > data on the web and let them be used by whomever it pleases. > > Regards, > Frans > > > On 31 August 2016 at 13:42, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com<mailto: > jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>> wrote: > I take from the discussion so far: > > * GML 3.3 does LR by defining a CRS > * LR is pretty specialised > * General GIS tooling does not typically support it; although specific > domains may (e.g. transport networks, hydrology, geology, navigation) > > I think that @eparsons is inferring that LR is too niche to be considered > a "best practice" for spatial data on the web; if data publishers _do_ use > LR in their systems, then they should publish the information using a > geometry that is computed from their domain-specific specialised tools. > > That would certainly give me less to write :-) ... but before concluding > this particular topic I'd like to see consensus from the group. > > So ... > > PROPOSAL: Linear Referencing is too niche to be considered a "best > practice" for spatial data on the web; if data publishers _do_ use LR in > their systems, then they should publish the information using a geometry > that is computed from their domain-specific specialised tools. > > Voting please: > +0 (I lack the hands on experience to judge) > > > Finally, I also note that I still need help on the "spatial relations" > topic that was second in my original email. More help required please. > > > Jeremy > > On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 at 12:18, Joshua Lieberman < > jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com<mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>> wrote: > It's also a part of stream hydrology, which is mainly there is a version > of it in sdwgeo. > > Josh > Joshua Lieberman, Ph.D. > Principal, Tumbling Walls Consultancy > Tel/Direct: +1 617-431-6431<tel:%2B1%20617-431-6431> > jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com<mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com> > > On Aug 31, 2016, at 06:23, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> > <Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> wrote: > Well you do see it in navigation systems. Time & distance. > > From: Ed Parsons [mailto:eparsons@google.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2016 7:49 PM > To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com<mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>>; > SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> > Subject: Re: Request for help: BP 9 "How to describe relative positions" > > I still question the need to include linear referencing, it's another very > specialised way to model spatial data and one which is not widely seen on > the web ? > > ed > > > On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 at 10:26 Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com<mailto: > jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi- > > BP doc section § 10.5.1 "Describing location" [1] is where we intend to > provide all the guidance that explains how you should encode location > information in a web-friendly way. > > This includes BP 8 "Provide geometries on the Web in a usable way" [2] and > BP 9 "How to describe relative positions" [3]. > > (I think it's likely that we will also need a BP to help people choose the > right CRS too ...) > > We editors envisage BP 9 covering: > > (1) Linear referencing > (2) Use of spatial relations [4] > > ... > > (1) > From a quick scan, I see that ISO 19148:2012 covers the topic of Linear > Referencing. I don't have access to the ISO document itself, so I've not > been able to read the standard ... but reviewing the UML model (accessible > here [5]) it seems VERY complicated. > > I also note that the INSPIRE Generic Network Model has a simpler > implementation of Linear Referencing. > > Questions: > a) are we limited to GML implementations for Linear Referencing? > b) has anyone converted the GML Application Schemas from ISO 19148 and > INSPIRE GNM into other formats ... particularly an RDF / OWL ontology? > c) are there any other mechanisms in use for Linear Referencing? e.g. can > LR be done with GeoJSON? > d) are people really using ISO 19148:2012 given it's complexity? > > INSPIRE's Transport Network specification v3.2 §10.3 "Linear Referencing" > states: > > “In general it is expected that linear referencing will be used to model > the relationships of objects that are associated with an network, but where > the position of those associated objects is not known (or required) to a > very high level of absolute accuracy ~ better than 1-3m at local level > (e.g. traffic accidents, planned works, restrictions). > > Where absolute accuracy is required (e.g. the location of drain covers, > excavations, line side signalling equipment, masts etc) such objects should > be reused, and referenced, if they already exist e.g. as topographic > features.” > > This seems like the basis of some guidance about when one might use Linear > Referencing. > > What I need (please!) are some worked examples for Linear Referencing of a > point along a linear feature and for Linear Referencing of a length along a > linear feature. In the flooding scenario, this might be: > * Location of flotsam / debris (point) blocking a drainage channel that > needs to manually cleared > * Location of a flooded section (length) of a road > > (2) > We also want to demonstrate how spatial relations are used. There are > obvious examples of topological relationships such as "this administrative > unit _touches_ that administrative unit" (or contains etc.). > > I recall that we were going to get the set of topological relationships > added to the IANA Link Relations registry [7]. I am not even sure which set > of topological relations we should be recommending? GeoSPARQL has me > somewhat confused with "Simple Features Relation", "Egenhofer Relation" and > "RCC8 Relation". Then there's D9-EIM too ... > > Can someone provide me some worked examples using the preferred set of > topological relationships? > > We also need to illustrate use of _directional_ (e.g. "left", "in front > of" and "astern") and _distance_ relations (e.g. "at", "nearby" and "far > away"). I don't know of any formalised vocabulary for expressing these > things. If there is one, should we be seeking to add these to the IANA Link > Relations registry too? > > Again, worked examples requested! If you can related them to an urban > environment / flooding scenario all the better. (e.g. someone might assert > "the flooding is near my house") > > Finally, we also need to show people how to express "fuzzy" spatial > things. Examples we have elsewhere in the BP doc are "the American West" > and "Renaissance Italy". These are spatial things were there is not general > agreement about the exact geographic extent, so it is not possible to use a > geometry to describe it. What is the best way to describe things like this? > Should we use spatial relations e.g. "downtown" _contains_ city districts > A, C, D, and G (because "everyone" agrees this) - but we're not saying it's > exact geometry because it's a colloquial term used by citizens of our > fictional Nieuwhaven. > > Again, I'd like to see a worked example. > > ... > > There's a lot of questions wrapped up in this email. I'm looking for help > to resolve them ... preferably with someone in the WG taking the lead to > coordinate a response. > > I'm also aware that we need to avoid an RDF bias, so it would be good to > have examples in other formats too. > > Volunteers, please step forward! > > Thanks in advance. Jeremy > > [1]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bp-expr-geo > [2]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#describe-geometry > [3]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#relative-position > [4]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#spatial-relations > [5]: https://github.com/ISO-TC211/HMMG > [6]: > http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/documents/Data_Specifications/INSPIRE_DataSpecification_TN_v3.2.pdf > [7]: http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml > > -- > Ed Parsons FRGS > Geospatial Technologist, Google > Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501<tel:%2B44%20%280%2920%207881%204501> > www.edparsons.com<http://www.edparsons.com/> @edparsons > > > > > > This message contains information, which may be in confidence and may be > subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you must > not peruse, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message. If you have > received this message in error, please notify us immediately (Phone 0800 > 665 463 or info@linz.govt.nz) and destroy the original message. LINZ > accepts no responsibility for changes to this email, or for any > attachments, after its transmission from LINZ. Thank You. > -- *Ed Parsons *FRGS Geospatial Technologist, Google Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501 www.edparsons.com @edparsons
Received on Thursday, 1 September 2016 10:24:16 UTC