[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [emergency] Circle and Polygon
Folks - This discussion on GML is way beyond the needs and requirements for representing CIRCLE and POLYGON geometries in EDXL. I would suggest that Len and I continue this dialogue "off-line". Cheers Carl ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@intergraph.com> To: "'Carl Reed OGC'" <creed@opengeospatial.org>; "Ham, Gary A" <hamg@BATTELLE.ORG>; "Renato Iannella" <renato@nicta.com.au>; "Emergency_Mgt_TC TC" <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 2:35 PM Subject: RE: [emergency] Circle and Polygon > Having taken a look at the referenced documents: > > 1. By claiming geography, GML claims geometry. I am > curious why you say this is not a mapping application. > It appears to be the geometric component which > can then be mixed via namespaces with other components, > but the primary application is mapping for information > management purposes. It is clearly GIS. It is not > the whole story on geometry. > > 2. GML application languages incorporate GML geometry. > Are they free to incorporate geometry from other vector > formats? > > The problem here is that not all elements that are spatio-temporal > and application specific are best described by this model. I > recognize the XML means and that is sound. However, the issues > of object-model behavioral fidelity and rendering fidelity are > not addressed AFAICT. Where GML is an excellent basis for > GIS, GIS is not the whole story of spatial management because > the most important aspects of distributed simulation are not > described. > > So there is a case to be made for X3D systems that reuse GML > information. I suspect however, there will be clashes in the > object model fidelity as rendered into the simulation systems. > It seems odd that the OGC works with SVG yet does not work > with X3D given that the other important standards (XSBC, > XMSF) work with X3D. What is the story for the use of GML > in real-time distributed simulation and visualization of > real world objects? > > len > > > From: Carl Reed OGC [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org] > > Claude - > > GML is not a mapping standard! GML is a standard, grounded in a variety of > ISO 19*** series standards, for > encoding/expressing/communicating/transporting > geographic/location/geospatially enabled content. Now, in terms of 3D, I > would strongly encourage you to check out LandGML > (http://www.transxml.org/GML+Experiment/Resources/261.aspx and > (http://www.opengeospatial.org/initiatives/?iid=133) and CityGML > (http://www.ikg.uni-bonn.de/sig3d/docs/Gi4Dm_2005_Kolbe_Groeger.pdf), both > application profiles of GML 3.1. > > In terms of SVG, there are any number of tools that do GML to SVG for > rendering. Some are free, some are for fee. > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]