[OSGeo-Discuss] RE: [vtp] 3d geoweb - Digital Earth - reference model

Ben Discoe ben at vterrain.org
Sat May 5 01:39:46 PDT 2007


> ----
> From: Mike Liebhold
> I've been thinking a lot about 3D GIS lately, about 
> interoperability of 3D objects in real world - virtual worlds 
> like Google earth, Microsoft- virtual earth, NASA wwind, ESRI 
> ARCglobe, companies like Autodesk have large legacy 3D GIS 
> & CAD systems

Interoperability is primarily about open standards: formats, protocols,
metadata.  If we can just get the various groups to do this, then there is a
chance.  The important things: stay open, stay simple enough that there is
not a big barrier to adoption.  For example, KML is not so bad; it is simple
enough that the rest of us could implement (or embrace and extend) it.
Something like CityGML, on the other hand, is an example of something which
is conceptually Open, but so complicated and over-reaching that few of the
above camps are likely to adopt it.

> still moving forward, and  no doubt someone like 
> Linden Labs will launch a 3d social apps in a real world - 
> virtual world..

Lab singular.  Back when Linden was starting, i talked with them about
whether they had any interest in the real world - i.e. should VTP work with
them.  They said no, fake worlds only, i.e. just another ActiveWorlds, only
with better funding and snazzier gfx.  If after these years they have
finally come around to the real world, that would be nice, but i don't
expect it.

> Will we have multiple 3D geowebs?

That's a fairly loaded question. :)  The term 'geoweb' IMHO is not helpful;
3D and geo make sense, but 'web' by implying WWW does not; HTTP is just
another carrier which may or may not be used as an underlying technology,
but it's rather irrelevant if it is.

> beyond harmonized 2D 
> geodata and geocoded hypermedia, will 3D data  and media 
> producers and service operators have to produce  and manage 
> multiple frameworks ( including places, buildings, things - 
> people& avatars ) for each or these environments? 

Not if we can convince the camps to use readily adopted formats, protocols,

> I'll be leading sessions at Where2.0 
> (http://conferences.oreillynet.com/where2007/) and ISDE5 
> (http://www.isde5.org/) to raise questions leading to 
> re-starting considering of a consensus reference 
> specification

Great.  I'll be presenting VTP again at ISDE5 myself; it'll be 9 years since
it made its debut at Siggraph '98.

> for a 3D geoweb - a standard Digital Earth.

...but please don't use the strange and dubious term 'geoweb'.

> google, no doubt,  sees kml as the answer to these questions, 

KML is a reasonable format for some 2D/3D geometry, but it totally lacks
meta info.  E.g. you could in theory model a tree with it, but GoogleEarth
or any other software loading the KML will have no idea it's a tree(!), let
alone any of the attributes that a forestry person would care about.  Put
two trees in a KML file, and GoogleEarth won't know you've got two of
anything, it only sees polygon soup.  In a way, it's a step backwards.

> I  have no idea how to organize a coherent dialog between the 
> e-mail list communities cc'd here.

I don't either, but i wish you the best of luck with it.


More information about the Discuss mailing list