The paper deals some problems with the scale and the possible concepts development of national topographical data infrastructure. There are two concepts in the procedure of structuring and updating of topographical data in digital (vector) form: model stars (discrete) and model steps (continuous). The discrete model consists of some basic data of framework. So, each of those data is updated separately. The continuous model concerning to the fundamental geospatial (topographical) data and all other data are generated from one level to another, in different scales and contents. There are some positive and negative characteristics in both concepts development of topographical data infrastructure. The first concept is good in this moment, but in the future the second concept will be better. However, it is very important that high level of modelling and automatization of procedures, both concepts support good possibilities for making and updating of topographical data infrastructure. Also, some experiences are presented in creating of the new topographic map by automated cartographic generalization.U radu se iznose neki problemi s mjerilom i mogući koncepti razvoja nacionalne infrastrukture topografskih podataka. U konceptu strukturiranja i održavanja topografskih podataka u digitalnom (vektorskom) obliku postoje dva osnovna koncepta: model zvjezdica (diskretni) i model ljestvica (kontinuirani) podataka. Diskretni model podrazumijeva kreiranje više osnovnih skupova geoprostornih (topografskih) podataka i njihovo održavanje. Kontinuirani model odnosi se na jedan osnovni (bazični) skup topografskih podataka i na osnovu njega izvođenje i održavanje (ažuriranje) svih ostalih nivoa ili skupova topografskih podataka, odnosno kreiranje skupova podataka različitih mjerila i sadržaja. Oba koncepta razvoja infrastrukture topografskih podataka imaju svoje prednosti i mane. Smatra se da je prvi koncept trenutno prihvatljiviji, a da je drugi koncept složeniji i ima veću perspektivu. Međutim, ono što je vrlo važno, a to je da uz veliki stupanj automatizacije i modeliranja pojedinih procesa, i jedan i drugi koncept pružaju mogućnosti novih kreiranja i održavanja podataka, odnosno izgradnju infrastrukture topografskih podataka. Također, prikazana su neka iskustva prilikom izrade nove topografske karte automatiziranom kartografskom generalizacijom

Mirko Borisov

English

HRČAK - Portal of Croatian Scientific and Professional Journals

UDK 528.93:528.915:528.425.4:004.6Pregledni znanstveni èlanakProblems of the Scale and Buildingof Topographical Data InfrastructureMirko BORISOV1 – BelgradeABSTRACT. The paper deals some problems with the scale and the possible conceptsdevelopment of national topographical data infrastructure. There are two concepts inthe procedure of structuring and updating of topographical data in digital (vector)form: model stars (discrete) and model steps (continuous). The discrete model con-sists of some basic data of framework. So, each of those data is updated separately.The continuous model concerning to the fundamental geospatial (topographical) da-ta and all other data are generated from one level to another, in different scales andcontents. There are some positive and negative characteristics in both concepts deve-lopment of topographical data infrastructure. The first concept is good in this mo-ment, but in the future the second concept will be better. However, it is very importantthat high level of modelling and automatization of procedures, both concepts supportgood possibilities for making and updating of topographical data infrastructure.Also, some experiences are presented in creating of the new topographic map by auto-mated cartographic generalization.Keywords: GIS, cartography, infrastructure of data, scale, generalization of data.1. IntroductionTimeliness and utility of topographical data, or geospatial data is increasingly de-teriorating. One of the main reasons is thought to be all solved by introducing in-formation technology. It is believed that enough of the existing organizationalstructure to introduce modern computer equipment with appropriate programsand software, and will be easy and quick way to get to a digital presentation of ob-jective geospatial reality. Another reason is that effective methods and proceduresfor the modernization of topographical data, or updating of geospatial contentthat would increase the quality and efficiency in the visualization of new carto-graphic overview, are not yet developed.Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116 1091Doc. Dr. Mirko Borisov, Military Geographical Institute, Ul. Mije Kovaèeviæa 5, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia,e-mail: vgi@vs.rs.In this difficult situation experienced cartography is under constant competitionfrom other reasons. Therefore, the first Google Earth users had the geoinforma-tion of better quality for geospatial orientation and GIS analysis free of charge.The second type of competition represents much better resolution of satellite ima-ges. And the third, it is also used more geodetic-cartographic surfaces that arescanned, but relatively outdated, too. However, all these surfaces have a seriousshortcoming, and this is their limited practical value. Unfortunately, nothing inthis area of geosciences is not so easy and quickly. It takes quite a knowledge, mo-ney and time. In this situation the question of the perspective of topographicaldata and cartography is raised.2. Cartography and Building of Infrastructure of Geospatial DataAlternative scanned maps or mosaics of aerophotos and satellite images arenot an equivalent replacement of digital maps. Therefore, there is not inter-preted on the model, but the physical pictures and recordings. Information aboutthe area (clips, drawings, maps) must be also structured and suitable for theuse and processing by computer, in addition to digital interpretations (Zeiler2002).Bearing all this in mind, it is necessary to define and adopt a long-term develop-ment strategy and the establishment of basic infrastructure of geospatial (topo-graphical) data. In the first phase to generate a series of digital (vector) maps,and then in the second phase of their rounding to the level of geospatial databasesand their permanent maintenance and updating (Longley et al. 2005). This willcreate the basic framework of topographical data for the future development ofcartography and GIS at all levels (Hiroshi 2008).On this issue, there are already some experiences and reflections. For example,Prof. Dietmar Grünreich, director of the German Bundesamt für Kartographieund Geodäsie (BKG), shows that the mapping data within the infrastructure ofthe area is at the beginning of a new era. In fact, speaking of geospatial data ba-ses, such as for example German Automated Topographic-Cartographic Informa-tion System (ATKIS), is particularly important to stress that does not exist yetdeveloped a complete process that would be one fundamental set of geospatial da-ta can automatically notify the other sets, i.e. topographic and cartographic datamodels in other scales (ATKIS 2000), (Hake et al. 2002).From the above mentioned reasons, the project ATKIS in BKG decided to digi-tize the first primary data sets with corresponding maps (1:25 000, 1:250 000,1:1 000 000), which according to the scale and density of details appropriate con-tent equivalent classical maps. After that they digitized graphical data, structuredand joined them topological, semantic and temporal attributes. In this way, theycreated the basic digital topographic models, and from them later created carto-graphic models. Also, they scanned all the maps and put them available to usersin raster format.Note that digital topographic data somewhat change the philosophy of cartograp-hic display. The aim is to find the simpler view that is released of excessivesymbology and aesthetics, but the emphasis on accuracy and as much as possible110 Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116updating of data. And finally, the most important is to build appropriate infra-structure of topographical data in order to provide using of geoinformation to wi-de range of users as simple as possible (NIMA 2000). Therefore, the classical taskof cartography is the same in the information society. Namely, the faithful repre-sentation of geospatial structures of the environment in mind of topographicalmodels is the assumption that we can create a visualization using cartographic re-presentation of the environment.3. Possible Concepts for Developing of Topographical Data InfrastructureWhat is important to general information about the area are high quality, whichmeans accurate and up to date, as so important that they be well structured andpresented. And to do that, they must be properly organized and modelled. Today,it is usually through the modelling process and data modelling as a ubiquitouspart of the national infrastructure of geospatial data. Geodesy and Cartographyare the sciences which naturally belongs to the obligations of their collection andmodelling. The main strategy in cartography today is how from one set of data toget to the other, and to be met the criteria of equivalence scale and density of con-tent.According to theory, “Organization of information about the area”, there aredifferent levels of information, which differs in quantity and content of datarequired for various needs of consideration, management or making decision.Therefore, there is so called information pyramid, or levels of data sets (Borisov2006).According to the “concept of discretization”, it is necessary more basic levels oftopographic data models of different degrees of detail (Figure 1). These levels areusually large, medium and small detailed. These levels can be the basis for pre-senting new, but relatively close to the scale and detail of content. Discretizationof “information pyramid” by certain levels means that from one to the other datasets coming election or the reduction of the content, in accordance with the requi-rements of that level. The choice of data or generalization is the process of for-ming new sets, and the characteristic parameters, and sometimes simply summa-rize the data (Lagrange et al. 1995). The data flows from one level of detail to re-latively close to (higher or lower) levels, when changing the by laws of cartograp-hic generalization (Hake et al. 2002).According to the “concept of continuity” for future topographic and cartographictasks is enough only one set, or set of source of data space (Figure 2). The newderived topographic and cartographic models first applied the method model ge-neralization and thus created the basic topographic models of structured data. Se-cond, for the purposes of cartographic display, topographic data model has to beredesigned and shaped to the equivalent model of cartography or use symbolisa-tion and visualization methods applied to geospatial data. The flow of data-chartsupward indicates that one to the other information comes to the level of conden-sations of data, in accordance with the scale and needs of appropriate level of de-tails.Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116 111One of the main tasks when it occurs is a selection of basic dimensions and reso-lution display in which data is collected from the field. Ideally a set of spatial datais disposed in the ratio 1:1, from which the generalization is performed for all sca-les and for all levels of detail content. As it is not possible, the problem is solvedin practice by selecting one as the basic scale, according to which the procedurescreate cartographic generalization data for all other dimensions. In our state it isthe cartographic scale of 1:25 000.112 Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116Fig. 1. The concept of discretization topographical data.Fig. 2. The concept of continuity of topographical data.4. Topographic Map Production by Automated GeneralizationGeneralization of the topographic data in digital form, beside basic cartographicprinciples is influenced by other criteria that are dependant on form of digital da-ta. In this case, digital data (map sheet) do not represent only stand alone graphi-cal representation but visualized spatial geodatabase. Organizing data in this wayallows, instead of simple vector graphic, higher level of automatization in processof cartographic generalization. Higher level of automatized generalization meansthat, according to our acknowledgement, up to 70% of content of different dataclasses can be automatically generalized directly from its supporting geodatabase.Percentage of generalization is dependent on cartographic generalization basicprinciples as well as on the relation between origin scale and required map scale.Most appropriate type of cartographic generalization for automatization processis reduction of geographical data while simplified presentation with cartographicsymbols and transformation of groups of elements into higher level elements aretypes of cartographic generalization where it is not possible to achieve greaterpercentage of automatization. For different data classes, generalization samplesin process of creating DTM50 from DTM25 are given in Figure 3.Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116 113Fig. 3. Samples of different data classes before and after generalization process: (a)Transportation (b) Relief (c) Population.The fundamental spatial data produced and added to the library at scale 1:25 000is used for new project. The objective of this project was to design 1:50 000 scaledigital topographic model (DTM) and cartographic production system. Accordingto statistics, 70% of cartographic processes are carried out automatically and therest are made interactively. On the other hand, time spent for production decrea-sed to 35%.In process of generalization from DTM25 to DTM50, creation is based on minorchanges which mean reduction of topographical data. Some problems related tochange of graphic primitives for mass elements are still present so we did not ma-nage to achieve greater percentage of automatized generalization without har-ming relations between other elements of the map sheet. Achieved percentage ofautomatization varies between 0 and 70%.Development of procedures for automatized generalization of content of DTM25in purpose of creating DTM50 is still in progress. The main goal is to achieve au-tomatization of generalization process in about 80% of cases for each elementclass. As mentioned above, our project group has created a semi-automatic pro-duction line by developing intelligent and sophisticated generalization tools usingArcGIS and its customization environment (ArcObjects, Visual Basic and C++Programming languages).5. ConclusionEmergence of new technologies for collecting, displaying and analyzing geospatialdata is also affected in our state to review and upgrade so far achieved results inthe field of digital cartography and GIS. Generating of a national infrastructureof topographical data represents just a step in that direction, and a very impor-tant step.This paper analyzed the two concepts. The concept is based on the generated vec-tor data as large, medium and small details, and relatively close to the scale (deta-il) to create new products from existing ones. The second concept is based on aprimary set of vector data, and all other datasets are derived from this set, regar-dless of the scale and detail. The state basic topographic map at 1:25 000 scale isselected as the basic set of topographic data, a good basis for creating models ofthe primary topographical model of data.At the end it is very important to say that the second concept (primary) is moreuseful and practice, especially in the case when all topographical data are in thesame database and they are displayed on unique way. It is better solution thanforming and using framework of data at different scales and density. When we ne-ed information of quality, it is very important to use international standards,(Moellering and Hogan 1997), (DMA 2000).114 Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116ReferencesATKIS (2000): Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Vermessungsverwaltungen der Lander derBundesrepublik Deutschland, Deutschland.Borisov, M. (2006): The Development of GIS, Monography, ZaduKbina Andrejeviæ, Bel-grade, Serbia.DMA (2000): The Digital Geographic Information Exchange Standard (DIGEST), USA.Hake, G., Grünreich, D., Meng, L. (2002): Kartographie, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.Hiroshi, M. (2008): New Legislation on NSDI in Japan – Basic Act on the Advancementof Utilizing Geospatial Information, Bulletin of the Geographical Survey Institute,Vol. 55, 1–10.Lagrange, J. P., Weibel, R., Müller, J. C. (1995): GIS And Generalisation: MethodologyAnd Practice (Gisdata, No. 1), Taylor & Francis, London.Longley, P. A., Goodchild, M. F., Maguire, D. J., Rhind, D. W. (2005): Geographic Infor-mation Systems and Science, 2nd Edition, Wiley, Chichester.Moellering, H., Hogan, R. (1997): Spatial Database Transfer Standards 2: Characteri-stics for Assessing Standards and Full Descriptions of the National and Internatio-nal Standards (International Cartographic Association), Pergamon Press.NIMA (2000): Digital Products: VMap Level 2, Vector Map (VMap) Level 1 & 2, DefenceImagery and Geospatial Organization, USA.Zeiler, M. (2002): Modeling Our World, The ESRI Guide to Geodatabase Design, Re-dlands, USA.URL 1: Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation,http://www.defence.gov.au/digo/Products/products.html, (10. 2. 2010.).URL 2: MapTrax,http://www.maptrax.com.au/c/149723/1/topographic-maps.html, (11. 2. 2010.).URL 3: East View Cartographic,http://www.cartographic.com/data/topographic/maps/catalog.asp, (15. 2. 2010.).URL 4: Ordnance Survey,http://www.ordsvy.gov.uk, (12. 2. 2010.).URL 5: Esri,http://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/summer07articles/siemens-esri-team.html,(13. 2. 2010.).Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116 115Problemi mjerila i izgradnje infrastrukturetopografskih podatakaSA+ETAK. U radu se iznose neki problemi s mjerilom i moguæi koncepti razvoja na-cionalne infrastrukture topografskih podataka. U konceptu strukturiranja i odr/a-vanja topografskih podataka u digitalnom (vektorskom) obliku postoje dva osnovnakoncepta: model zvjezdica (diskretni) i model ljestvica (kontinuirani) podataka.Diskretni model podrazumijeva kreiranje više osnovnih skupova geoprostornih (to-pografskih) podataka i njihovo odr/avanje. Kontinuirani model odnosi se na jedanosnovni (bazièni) skup topografskih podataka i na osnovu njega izvoðenje i odr/a-vanje (a/uriranje) svih ostalih nivoa ili skupova topografskih podataka, odnosnokreiranje skupova podataka razlièitih mjerila i sadr/aja. Oba koncepta razvojainfrastrukture topografskih podataka imaju svoje prednosti i mane. Smatra se daje prvi koncept trenutno prihvatljiviji, a da je drugi koncept slo/eniji i ima veæuperspektivu. Meðutim, ono što je vrlo va/no, a to je da uz veliki stupanj automatiza-cije i modeliranja pojedinih procesa, i jedan i drugi koncept pru/aju moguænosti no-vih kreiranja i odr/avanja podataka, odnosno izgradnju infrastrukture topografskihpodataka. Takoðer, prikazana su neka iskustva prilikom izrade nove topografskekarte automatiziranom kartografskom generalizacijom.Kljuène rijeèi: GIS, kartografija, infrastruktura podataka, mjerilo, generalizacijapodataka.Prihvaæeno: 2010-05-14116 Borisov, M.: Problems of the Scale and Building of Topographical …, Geod. list 2010, 2, 109–116

Problemi mjerila i izgradnje infrastrukture topografskih podataka

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

HRČAK - Portal of Croatian Scientific and Professional Journals

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia