[Requests] Comments on Topic 21: Discrete Global Grid System Abstract Specification

Robert Gibb Gibbr at landcareresearch.co.nz
Wed Apr 5 06:28:08 EDT 2017


Evaluator:                 Robert Gibb, on behalf of DGGS SWG Chairs
Document Number:  OGC 15-104r4
Document Name:      Topic 21: Discrete Global Grid Systems Abstract Specification

Comments:
These are the consolidated comments from the DGGS SWG chair, arising from various informal discussions at OGC TC Delft and elsewhere.

COVERAGE: Josh Leiberman (at OAB meeting) commented that our use of the word 'coverage' leads the reader to think that DGGS grids are coverages as defined in the OGC/ISO/INSPIRE Coverage standards. While this may be partially true, most usage of the word coverage is colloquial, which can lead to confusion particularly for English as a second language readers speakers. Please consider each instance of the word to determine whether it is the most appropriate word for the context.

ABSTRACT SPEC: the SWG editors noted there is one remaining instance of a reference to future work creating an Abstract Spec - please remove or review.

MINOR-EDITS: Ref [10] is now published rather than being forthcoming, please update

INTRODUCTION: Peter Strobl provided some minor editorial rewording for the introduction of the DGGS DWG Charter, that addresses a confusion he had on first encountering the SWGs DGGS documentation, This suggested new wording may also be appropriate in the current document.

DIRECTPOSITION: Mark Hedley (CRS SWG) notes that the inheritance link between CellID and DirectPosition is too strong in Fig 8, resulting in a circular reference, and Mark & Robert have come up with a minor change to the UML that removes the circular reference but retains the intent. Instead of the inheritance link to DirectPosition we propose adding an operation to CellPosition that operates on CellID to generate a Direct Position. Also check Fig 10, to see if it needs adjusting as a result of the change.
CELL-ORDER: Chris Little & Robert realized in discussion that the concepts of Cell Order or Cell Serialisation, might better represent what the Abstract Spec is trying to achieve with the Cell ID than the concept of a Cell Identifier. Ordering or Serialisation along a space filling curve is widely recognized as a valid functional activity and still has the concept of uniqueness, whereas a Cell Index or GUID, is more normally associated with an internal implementation issue. Please consider this suggestion.

Regards
Robert
on behalf of the DGGS SWG Chair

Robert Gibb
Research Associate - Informatics
cell UK: +44 (7517) 338 651 | NZ: +64 (21) 0245 0214
Skype: robert.g.gibb | Google+: r.g.gibb

[email-signature-logo]<http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/about/people/staff-details?id=Z2liYnI=>




________________________________

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Warning: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you receive it in error: (i) you must not read, use, disclose, copy or retain it; (ii) please contact the sender immediately by reply email and then delete the emails.
The views expressed in this email may not be those of Landcare Research New Zealand Limited. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/requests/attachments/20170405/272e03f8/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 14997 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/requests/attachments/20170405/272e03f8/attachment-0001.png>


More information about the Requests mailing list