[Requests] Comment on candidate Symbology Conceptual Core Model standard

Zhao, Patty (NRCan/RNCan) patty.zhao at canada.ca
Mon Nov 19 16:06:23 EST 2018


PART A
1. Evaluator:
        Sean Eagles (GIS Data Analyst, email: sean.eagles at canada.ca<mailto:sean.eagles at canada.ca>) and Patty Zhao (Research Geographer, email: patty.zhao at canada.ca<mailto:patty.zhao at canada.ca>) from Federal Geospatial Platform Division, Canada Centre for Mapping and Earth Observation Branch, Strategic Policy and Results Sector, Natural resources Canada

2. Submission: 18-067, OGC Symbology Conceptual Model: Core part


PART B
1. Requirement:  General
2. Implementation Specification Section number: General
3. Criticality:
4. Comments/justifications for changes: Comments

·         With the use of different standards like FGDC, how does this standard work for those working with an older existing standard?  Here at Natural Resources Canada our Geological Survey of Canada emulated FGDC and created our own customized symbology sets for Surficial and Bedrock mapping.  Will we have to describe all of the 1000's of symbols to become compliant, and if so will there be any cross-walk documents to describe how this would be done?

·         Most of symbols we use are from vender software. How does this standard work for those symbols from vendor software?

·         Occasionally symbols are created and used for a product we produce, but these symbols are not for distribution. Would this kind of symbols need to be compliant with this new standard?

·         Some types of symbols we used in web map services do not display well on the web.  However they display well in desktop applications, such as hatched fill symbols.  Maybe this problem is caused by the viewer being used, or maybe this is caused by how the symbol is encoded.  Will this new standard help eliminate this kind of issue so that all symbols display well in different viewers and in different browsers?

PART B
1. Requirement: General
2. Implementation Specification Section number: Annexe A Example implementation
3. Criticality: Minor, Editorial,
4. Comments/justifications for changes: Comments

·         If there could be an annex for examples of how symbols are implemented and described that would help us implement the standard if we needed to use it.

·         The testing sites need to be put up to be able to follow the testing procedures.  Testing encoding procedures may require documentation on encoding standards followed.
Thank you,
Patty (Xiaopei) Zhao
Research Geographer
Federal Geospatial Platform
Canada Centre for Mapping and Earth Observation
Natural Resources Canada
Government of Canada
patty.zhao at canada.ca<mailto:patty.zhao at canada.ca>  / Tel:  613-759-1951

Géographe-chercheuse
Plateforme géospatiale fédérale
Centre canadien de cartographie et d'observation de la Terre
Ressources naturelles Canada
Gouvernement du Canada
patty.zhao at canada.ca<mailto:patty.zhao at canada.ca> / Tél. :  613-759-1951

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/requests/attachments/20181119/bfb4d2d8/attachment.html>


More information about the Requests mailing list