Adam, The SDW and GDAL lists have many formats in common. SDW list has additional attributes/columns.
I encourage you to send a message to the SDW email reflector to make them aware of the GDAL list. Many on that list will be familiar/intimate with GDAL, others will not - there is a wide web crowd on that reflector. If you want to follow along or participate: The project page is here. http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/groups/sdwwg <http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/groups/sdwwg> Proceedings are public. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/ <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/> Its a joint project of OGC and W3. George > On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:38 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > good question - maybe reach out to George directly and ask? > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > Chief Architect > Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA > Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 > Email: [email protected] > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Estrada <[email protected]> > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:33 AM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: FW: ACTION-98: Look at a list/matrix of the common formats > (geojson, gml, rdf, json-ld) and what you can or can't achieve with it > >> Thanks Chris...Is this list essentially from the GDAL/OGR list here? >> >> http://www.gdal.org/ogr_formats.html >> >> A >> >> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Passing along to the Apache SIS community since I think this >>> will be useful as well. >>> >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >>> Chief Architect >>> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) >>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >>> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 >>> Email: [email protected] >>> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department >>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: George Percivall <[email protected]> >>> Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 6:09 AM >>> To: jpluser <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Fwd: ACTION-98: Look at a list/matrix of the common formats >>> (geojson, gml, rdf, json-ld) and what you can or can't achieve with it >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Chris, >>>> >>>> >>>> I recall you were involved or leading an ESDSWG working group on GIS >>>> vector formats. That group might find the table below of value. >>>> >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>> >>>> From: >>>> Clemens Portele <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> Date: >>>> November 25, 2015 at 7:57:06 AM EST >>>> >>>> To: >>>> SDW WG Public List <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> ACTION-98: Look at a list/matrix of the common formats (geojson, gml, >>>> rdf, json-ld) and what you can or can't achieve with it >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> below is a first attempt at such a matrix for vector data only. >>>> >>>> Beside a review (I am not sure that everything is correct or adequate) >>>> this would need >>>> - additional explanations in text, >>>> - more work to align the terminology with the rest of the BP to make it >>>> understandable for the different target audiences, >>>> - links to the specification for each format. >>>> >>>> But before we work on this, I think we should have a discussion whether >>>> - this is what we were looking for in general, >>>> - the list of aspects is complete, too much, or missing important >>>> aspects >>>> (e.g. time support, closely coupled APIs / service interfaces, etc), >>>> - the list of formats is ok or whether we need to remove / add some. >>>> >>>> I hope the table is still readable once it passes the W3C list software >>>> :) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> GML >>>> GML-SF0 >>>> JSON-LD >>>> GeoSPARQL (vocabulary)Schema.org <http://schema.org> >>>> GeoJSON >>>> KML >>>> GeoPackage >>>> Shapefile >>>> GeoServices / Esri JSON >>>> Mapbox Vector Tiles >>>> Governing Body >>>> OGC, ISO >>>> OGC >>>> W3C >>>> OGC >>>> Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Yandex >>>> Authors (now in IETF process) >>>> OGC >>>> OGC >>>> Esri >>>> Esri >>>> Mapbox >>>> Based on >>>> XML >>>> GML >>>> JSON >>>> RDF >>>> HTML with RDFa, Microdata, JSON-LD >>>> JSON >>>> XML >>>> SQLite, SF SQL >>>> dBASE >>>> JSON >>>> Google protocol buffers >>>> Requires authoring of a vocabulary/schema for my data (or use of >>>> existing >>>> ones) >>>> Yes (using XML Schema) >>>> Yes (using XML Schema) >>>> Yes (using >>>> @context) >>>> Yes (using RDF schema) >>>> No, schema.org <http://schema.org/> specifies a vocabulary that should >>>> be >>>> used >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Implicitly (SQLite tables) >>>> Implicitly (dBASE table) >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Supports reuse of third party vocabularies for features and properties >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Supports extensions (geometry types, metadata, etc.) >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> No (under discussion in IETF) >>>> Yes (rarely used except by Google) >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Supports non-simple property values >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes (in practice: not used) >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Supports multiple values per property >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes (in practice: not used) >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Supports multiple geometries per feature >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> n/a >>>> Yes >>>> Yes (but probably not in practice?) >>>> No >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Support for Coordinate Reference Systems >>>> any >>>> any >>>> n/a >>>> many >>>> WGS84 latitude, longitude >>>> WGS84 longitude, latitude with optional elevation >>>> WGS84 longitude, latitude with optional elevation >>>> many >>>> many >>>> many >>>> WGS84 spherical mercator projection >>>> Support for non-linear interpolations in curves >>>> Yes >>>> Yes (only arcs) >>>> n/a >>>> Yes (using GML) >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Yes, in an extension >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Support for non-planar interpolations in surfaces >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> n/a >>>> Yes (using GML) >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Support for solids (3D) >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> n/a >>>> Yes (using GML) >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Feature in a feature collection has URI (required for ★★★★) >>>> Yes, via XML ID >>>> Yes, via XML ID >>>> Yes, via @id keyword >>>> Yes >>>> Yes, via HTML ID >>>> No >>>> Yes, via XML ID >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Support for hyperlinks (required for ★★★★★) >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> Yes >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> No >>>> Media type >>>> application/gml+xml >>>> application/gml+xml with profile parameter >>>> application/ld+json >>>> application/rdf+xml, application/ld+json, etc. >>>> text/html >>>> application/vnd.geo+json >>>> application/vnd.google-earth.kml+xml, application/vnd.google-earth.kmz >>>> - >>>> - >>>> - >>>> - >>>> Remarks >>>> comprehensive and supporting many use cases, but requires strong XML >>>> skills >>>> simplified profile of GML >>>> no support for spatial data, a GeoJSON-LD is under discussion >>>> GeoSPARQL also specifies related extension functions for SPARQL; >>>> other geospatial vocabularies exist, see ???schema.org >>>> <http://schema.org/> markup is indexed by major search engines >>>> supported by many mapping APIs >>>> focussed on visualisation of and interaction with spatial data, >>>> typically >>>> in Earth browsers liek Google Earth >>>> used to support "native" access to geospatial data across all enterprise >>>> and personal computing environments, including mobile devices >>>> supported by >>>> almost all GIS >>>> mainly used via the GeoServices REST API >>>> used for sharing geospatial data in tiles, mainly for display in maps >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Clemens >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
