Clearly interesting, although the development and standardisation of encoding would be outside the scope of the group ? There is clearly a common thread of moving away from pointy brackets (XML), perhaps there is something the group can do highlight common patterns in this process. Ed On Fri, 2 Feb 2018 at 09:00 Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote: > Hi group, > > At the end of last year I had a discussion with Hugo Ledoux of Delft > University. He and some others have created a spatial data format called > CityJSON and are looking for options to further develop and possibly > standardize this format. > > CityJSON is an encoding of CityGML, an open standardised data model and > exchange format to store digital 3D models of cities and landscapes. > CityGML is implemented as an application schema for GML3, and it is an > official international standard of the OGC. > > CityJSON is an alternative encoding in, you guessed it, JSON. The aim of > CityJSON is to offer an alternative to the GML encoding of CityGML, which > can be verbose and complex. CityJSON aims at being easy-to-use, both for > reading datasets, and for creating them. It was designed with programmers > in mind, so that tools and APIs supporting it can be quickly built. It was > also designed to be compact, and friendly for web and mobile development. > See http://www.cityjson.org/ for more. > > Because the SDWIG is all about web-, programmer-, and mobile development > friendly standards, I think CityJSON could be of interest to this group. > > Any thoughts, opinions? > > Linda > -- *Ed Parsons *FRGS Geospatial Technologist, Google +44 7825 382263 @edparsons www.edparsons.comReceived on Friday, 2 February 2018 08:23:48 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:30:59 UTC