Volume XLII-4/W15
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLII-4/W15, 89–96, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W15-89-2019
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLII-4/W15, 89–96, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W15-89-2019
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

  23 Sep 2019

23 Sep 2019

TOWARDS A GENERIC 3D STANDARDISATION APPROACH FOR THE NETHERLANDS SUPPORTING DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS AND ENCODINGS

J. Stoter1,2,3, H. Ledoux1, F. Penninga2, L. van den Brink2, M. Reuvers3, M. Vermeij4, and M. G. Wiersma1 J. Stoter et al.
  • 13D Geoinformation group, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands
  • 2Geonovum, the Netherlands
  • 3Kadaster, the Netherlands
  • 4City of Rotterdam, the Netherlands

Keywords: 3D standardisation, 3D data models, 3D applications, UML, JSON, Linked data

Abstract. In this paper we present an open and flexible approach for the standardisation of 3D geographical data, describing our physical environment in such a way that it can serve different applications. The aim of our approach is to keep the standard as simple as possible so that implementation in different software is straightforward and the reuse of once collected 3D data in different domains is optimally supported. Therefore, we propose to model the semantics of real-world objects independent from their application and we distinguish between the conceptual model and encoding. The result is a 3-layer approach, in which the first layer contains the conceptual model: the object types with their definitions and properties. This layer reuses definitions of various existing models (national and international) as much as possible. The second layer contains the modelling constraints: the set of rules that define how the objects from the conceptual model are represented in 3D as needed for a specific context or application. This second layer contains additional (3D) requirements to standardise the 3D representations of the objects. The third layer contains encoding profiles, thus specifying how different formats can best be encoded; these formats could be JSON or XML/GML.

In this paper we motivate and describe our approach. For a small area we have developed a prototype that implements the 3 different layers. The prototype shows how the approach can be implemented for one specific application and additionally it provides insight into further development.