Re: [emergency] Circle and Polygon

["Carl Reed OGC" <creed@opengeospatial.org>]

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.
>
>