One thing that strikes me as potentially important for OAM is getting away
from the idea of just a few global "layers".  I wonder if it is feasible to
instead have the global layer that folks look at made up, somewhat
dynamically, of some arbitrary number of layers that are the best fit for
what someone is wanting to look at.

I get the impression that the suggested layer workflow right now is we start
with some base data (blue marble?) and then as "better" data arrives (NAIP
for the US, some 2cm data from a model plane for my neighborhood, whatever),
we mosaic it in to the master global layer.  Each tile might then have some
set of provenance metadata, perhaps with historical sources of the tile, but
definitely with the X number of sources that may right now be displayed on
that tile (where in the existing mosaic suggestion, X would always be 1).

I've been looking at Google Earth a little this week, and I really like the
historical imagery abilities.  As you change locations, different sets of
imagery become available.  If you haven't checked it out, you should.  These
days, it is far from impossible for browser-based maps to do similar magic,
and it seems like maybe the upcoming architecture of OAM could allow for,
and even recommend, a setup where clients expect to get different tile
layers for different regions and different criteria.

In this scenario, instead of some new data from my kite-cam being viciously
(and not in a visually appealing way) mosaic'd into "the" global layer, it
first gets added to my local tile server(s) with appropriate bounds and
metadata, and based on that metadata it will propagate to other tileservers,
and may even a) get requested by various clients who would overlay it
amongst whatever other base layer(s) they have onscreen, and b) mosaic'd
into one of the appropriate global layers.

One downside to this is much more data needs to be stored than if you just
have a couple total layers.  But an upside is not requiring datasets to
compete for which shows up on "the" layer, which in my mind makes the future
OAM a much more useful tool.  Think of  things like visualizing historical
change, whether that's forest cover over decades, or UAV imagery from a
crisis situation over a period of days.  Or just being able to view an area
comprised of a single source of imagery w/o having it not only uglified, but
also made useless for any analysis by a few tiles of "better" imagery
someone stuck in the middle.

I realize arbitrary layers make for a more complex metadata and distribution
system, but I don't think that's unsolvable.   Am I the only one who thinks
it's worth it?  And please let me know if I'm missing some key technical
point that makes it infeasible.

-Josh
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://openaerialmap.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_openaerialmap.org

Reply via email to