48
2 Geomatics standards
standards that have been developed outside the world ofthe ISO 19100 standards before the work of ISO/TC211 had started. These functional standards are planned to
become profiles of the ISO 19100 family.
Profiles and functional standards are discussed in section 3.1.4.
2.3 Future of geomatics standardisation
2.3.1 Implementation strategies
Since the development of the basic standards of the ISO 19100 family has almost
come to completion their implementation has started. The strategies for implementing the mostly abstract ISO 19100 standards is not a standard on its OWn. However,
some typical approaches can be reported.
The ISO/TC21I has about 60 member countries and 20 externailiaison organizations. While participating in the work of ISO/TC211 the members have committed
themselves to adopt the resulting standards in their horne environment. However, the
implementations will vary from country to country, from organization to organization, in some cases even from province to province.
Hardly any implementation will require the complete functionality of the ISO
19100 series. Instead, mostly only a subset of the abstract standards will be substantiated. The implementations remain compatible as far as their application schema
overlap. The usage of the ISO 19100 guarantees a common underlying abstract
model that enable compatibility ifthe applications schemas are the same.
The Open GIS Consortium (OGC) plays an important role on the implementation
level. In theory, the ISO/TC211 develops the abstract standards and the OGC developes the implementations standards. In practice, the borderline is not drawn that
clearly.
The ISO/TC21I has created some of the ISO 19100 standards based on proposals
from the OGc. Two typical examples are the ISO 19123 (Schema for coverage geometry and functions) and the ISO 19133 (Location based services tracking and
navigation). Those standards are implementation standards. On the other hand the
OGC has developed a comprehensive Abstract Specification that has been completed
in 1999 but hardly touched since.
The partitioning of the work between the ISO/TC211 and the OGC has turned out
to be fruitful for the geomatics community. The development of an ISO standard
may take up to five years. This is acceptable for long-term abstract standards that enjoy a COnsenSUS among the large international community. But that time is far too
long for implemented computer software. Programmed tools would just ignore the
official standards. The implementation became the domain of the OGC. An example
is the Geography Markup Language, version 3.0 (GML 3.0). The GML 3.0 is an almost complete implementation ofthe ISO 19107 (Spatial schema). It has been ques-
2 Geomatics standards
standards that have been developed outside the world ofthe ISO 19100 standards before the work of ISO/TC211 had started. These functional standards are planned to
become profiles of the ISO 19100 family.
Profiles and functional standards are discussed in section 3.1.4.
2.3 Future of geomatics standardisation
2.3.1 Implementation strategies
Since the development of the basic standards of the ISO 19100 family has almost
come to completion their implementation has started. The strategies for implementing the mostly abstract ISO 19100 standards is not a standard on its OWn. However,
some typical approaches can be reported.
The ISO/TC21I has about 60 member countries and 20 externailiaison organizations. While participating in the work of ISO/TC211 the members have committed
themselves to adopt the resulting standards in their horne environment. However, the
implementations will vary from country to country, from organization to organization, in some cases even from province to province.
Hardly any implementation will require the complete functionality of the ISO
19100 series. Instead, mostly only a subset of the abstract standards will be substantiated. The implementations remain compatible as far as their application schema
overlap. The usage of the ISO 19100 guarantees a common underlying abstract
model that enable compatibility ifthe applications schemas are the same.
The Open GIS Consortium (OGC) plays an important role on the implementation
level. In theory, the ISO/TC211 develops the abstract standards and the OGC developes the implementations standards. In practice, the borderline is not drawn that
clearly.
The ISO/TC21I has created some of the ISO 19100 standards based on proposals
from the OGc. Two typical examples are the ISO 19123 (Schema for coverage geometry and functions) and the ISO 19133 (Location based services tracking and
navigation). Those standards are implementation standards. On the other hand the
OGC has developed a comprehensive Abstract Specification that has been completed
in 1999 but hardly touched since.
The partitioning of the work between the ISO/TC211 and the OGC has turned out
to be fruitful for the geomatics community. The development of an ISO standard
may take up to five years. This is acceptable for long-term abstract standards that enjoy a COnsenSUS among the large international community. But that time is far too
long for implemented computer software. Programmed tools would just ignore the
official standards. The implementation became the domain of the OGC. An example
is the Geography Markup Language, version 3.0 (GML 3.0). The GML 3.0 is an almost complete implementation ofthe ISO 19107 (Spatial schema). It has been ques-