CityGML

  1. The CityGML encoding standard is a rich and valuable road map for building 3D urban geo-databases – kudos to all involved.
  2. LiDAR and laser scanning are the most appropriate technology for building out these databases.
  3. We can choose to take advantage of this or re-invent the wheel.

citygml

In preparing for my presentation for the 3D Fusion Summit I have had a chance to look a lot more closely at the CityGML standard. First of all, since I know first hand how difficult it is to produce something like this, I want to recognize the work of all involved, including the 3DIM Working Group, the OGC and the Special Interest Group 3D of the Initiative Geodata Infrastructure North-Rhine Westphalia. The latter is a group in Germany that is actually responsible for delivering the standard, and who, along with other groups in Germany, have been the leaders of this effort worldwide.

In addition, the 3DIM working group includes Autodesk, Bentley and the Ordnance Survey to name a few other groups. Bottom line – a number of major players are involved with this effort on a worldwide basis. Time to pay attention.

I think it is also important to note that CityGML is described as an encoding standard. If you take the time to read this document you will realize that this is a perfect description. The standard lays out the details of an XML schema for representing most of the elements of an urban landscape including buildings, city furniture, vegetation, water bodies, etc. If the industry buys in, there can be an elegant exchange of information among all stakeholders.

CityGML also specifies 5 levels of detail (LOD), another important data model organizational concept. These range from a 2.5 D digital terrain model to specifying doors and windows. The standard includes  a table of dimensional accuracy associated with each LOD. It is noted that this is just preliminary and that more work needs to be done in this area. I agree.

LiDAR and laser scanning have the potential to be the catalyst for a 5 to 10 year effort to build out these 3D CityGML geo-databases. This is the only realistic approach to acquiring this data in a cost effective manner.

CityGML provides the road map. GIS never had this. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel, unless we want to.

This post was written by Gene V. Roe


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on Monday, June 22nd, 2009 at 12:55 pm and is filed under Business Development, Conferences, Education, Orgs, Research, Standards, Technology, The Industry. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 Responses to “CityGML”

  1. Ed Oliveras Says:

    Gene,
    What purpose does the digital city info serve?
    Who wants 3d models of the city and what do they do with these models?

  2. Gene V. Roe Says:

    Well, that is an interesting question. There is a worldwide interest in building 3D city models. One of the main issues is with the LOD – level of detail. This is where the real the answers to your questions have to be framed. If it is only for visualization purposes than scanning is not likely to make sense or be cost effective, but if the application requires higher dimensional and locational accuracy in 3D then at some point laser scanning and LiDAR are going to make sense.

    The potential applications include:

    Urban Planning
    Permitting
    Assessing
    Solar rights
    Shadow Studies
    Tourism
    Emergency planning
    Homeland Security

    I think you get the idea. It’s all made more understandable with a 3D model.

Leave a Reply