International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part B4. Istanbul 2004
Level 1: This is a simple approach, which cross references the
identifier in the user’s database with an identifier in the
reference information, ideally on a 1:1 basis. No attempt to
manage any associated geometry is made. This approach
ensures that the user information is geographically linked and
the reference, about the same object, can be shared with others
who may also hold information about that object. For example
crimes committed in a particular building or address. This also
provides a step towards level 2.
Level 2: Geometry is introduced in this level. This is referenced
either to a single feature or collection of features, as in Figure 4
(above). The resulting composite feature is stored in the users
system along with references to these components. The user
again is able to share information with others, ease data
management, improve data integrity and will benefit from
updates to the underlying features to maintain a consistent level
of currency in their own data.
Level 3: It is possible for the user not to hold any
geometry/geography at all (apart perhaps, from any they might
create of their own). Again using the same approach in Figure
4, the user would simply hold the references and their
geographic feature would be constructed only when required.
This effectively requires a database driven solution and ideally
some form of reliable Web Feature Serving (WFS) if local
reference data holding is to be dispensed with. As a technically
advanced solution it potentially offers the greatest gains in
terms of data management, data sharing and process
automation.
5.2 Testing the Concept
Several organisations across government and the private sector
have built applications around the TOID. Currently several
further testbeds are being undertaken to develop, refine and
document the methods. It is clear that feature lifecycles need to
be better managed by all stakeholders (reference information
providers and application users) and rules determined and
evolved to ensure changes are made when agreed conditions are
reached. For reliability these should be as automated as
possible.
$3 Benefits
While we are still in the early day's development of DNF,
which is recognised as a medium to long-term development,
several benefits can be identified:
Savings
e Reduced data collection and maintenance costs
e Reduced data duplication
o Rednced data integration costs and times
Data Quality
e Improved data integrity across all adopting datasets
e Better data quality (currency, consistency, accuracy,
completeness)
Automation
e- Easier and greater reliability in information/data
interoperability.
e Easier user data exchange and sharing
e “Plug and play information” offering faster solutions
292
Better solutions
e Greater clarity and emergence of definitive core
datasets
e Inclusive & open — many organisations may contribute
e Improved intra and inter-business communication
e Greater reuse of information and thereby higher value
of that information.
Ultimately this will contribute to a stronger knowledge
economy at the local, regional, national and international
levels.
6. CONCLUSONS
In conclusion:
e we are in the midst of a revolution in the growth,
acquisition, use, dissemination and use of information. This
is impacting on the GI community and us all in particular in
terms of deriving knowledge and decision-making.
e this should be an opportunity to capitalise on the
knowledge, experience and skills to maximise the
investment in GI and to reaches it’s full potential. However
the rush to collect data, easy to use new technologies and
organisational barriers may significantly undermine this
goal.
e The DNF concept is an evolutionary inclusive framework to
develop a coherent and consistent approach to
georeferencing and integration of disparate datasets that are
underpinned and bridged by geography.
REFERENCES
Literature:
Luzet, C., & Land N., (2004). EuroSpec — a cornerstone for the
building of the European Spatial Data Infrastructure. The
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing
and Spatial Information Sciences. Istanbul, Turkey, [In
preparation]
Murray, K.J., Bray C., and Steenson T. (2001). Better
connected — the three Ordnance Surveys improve
georeferencing links. Proceedings of the Association of
Geographic Information Conference 2001 (section t2.7) [CD-
ROM]. London, UK.
Ordnance Survey, (1938). Final Report of the departmental
Committee on the Ordnance Survey. London: HMSO.
Ordnance Survey, (2000). The Digital National Framework -
Consultation paper 2000/1 [no longer available online — but can
be obtained from the authors!
Websites:
European Commission (2004). Homepage of the INSPIRE
website. Available from: http://inspire.jrc.it/home.html
(accessed 30 April 2004)
OXERA (1999). The economic contribution of Ordnance
Survey GB. Oxford Economic Research Associates Ltd.
Oxford.
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/aboutus/reports/ox
era/index.html (accessed 30 April 2004).
“Re
"Na
Tech
Key M
ABST
The fu
to reli:
manag
geospe
Nigeri
and m
develo
of the:
therefc
Nigeri:
space |
the est
presen
statem
the po
organi:
interna
efficiei
develo
* Corre:
