Ben Domenico wrote:
[...snip...]
Others may disagree with me on this, but the other documents I find
helpful in understanding these feature/coverage concepts are those of
OGC Observations and Measurements.
http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/om
In particular they define "features of interest," examples of which
might be the Indian Ocean or the atmosphere above London. This sort
of feature fits will into metoceans community which models such
entities in terms of functions governed by the equations of fluid
dynamics.
Hi Ben,
Not to join the discussion in its essence, but a digression to share an
experience regarding the application of "Feature of Interest". In the
NOAA IOOS efforts (i.e. in the context of the coastal oceans) to define
an XML application schema suitable for SOS this topic came up.
Agreement on what the "Feature of Interest" was became elusive in some
cases, because the scope of interest by the final user of the data is
often ambiguous. If we place a mooring in the shelf region off Fudge
Point, Hartstine Island, Washington, in Case Inlet in southern Puget
Sound is the feature of interest
* Fudge Point shelf?
* Hartstine Island beaches?
* Case Inlet?
* South Puget Sound?
* Puget Sound?
* US NorthWest Pacific Coast
If there is a clear guideline on how to blend ones gazetteer with the
"Feature of Interest" to resolve this ambiguity, our folks in IOOS
didn't find it. Might this be another example where the continuous
nature of the medium (ocean or atmosphere), renders otherwise
straightforward GIS concepts fuzzy?
- Steve
