Geographic Information — Gap-analysis: mapping and describing the differences between the current GDF and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models to suggest ways to harmonize and resolve conflicting issues

This document maps and describes the differences between GDF (ISO 20524 series), from ISO/TC 204, and conceptual models from the ISO 19100 family, from ISO/TC 211, and suggests ways to harmonize and resolve issues of conflict. Throughout this document, reference to GDF refers to GDF v5.1, ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2, unless expressly identified otherwise. Where necessary, reference will be made to Part 1 or Part 2.

Titre manque

General Information

Status
Published
Publication Date
15-Jun-2021
Current Stage
6060 - International Standard published
Start Date
16-Jun-2021
Due Date
31-May-2022
Completion Date
16-Jun-2021
Ref Project

Buy Standard

Technical report
ISO/TR 19169:2021 - Geographic Information -- Gap-analysis: mapping and describing the differences between the current GDF and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models to suggest ways to harmonize and resolve conflicting issues
English language
60 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview
Draft
ISO/PRF TR 19169:Version 18-apr-2021 - Geographic Information -- Gap-analysis: mapping and describing the differences between the current GDF and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models to suggest ways to harmonize and resolve conflicting issues
English language
60 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

Standards Content (Sample)

TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 19169
First edition
2021-06
Geographic Information — Gap-
analysis: mapping and describing the
differences between the current GDF
and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models
to suggest ways to harmonize and
resolve conflicting issues
Reference number
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)
©
ISO 2021

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
© ISO 2021
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting
on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address
below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms . 1
5 Comparing terms and definitions . 2
6 Business considerations . 2
7 Reference model . 3
7.1 General structure . 3
7.1.1 Analysis . 3
7.1.2 Consideration of options . 5
7.1.3 Recommendation and expected impact . 6
7.2 General Conceptual Models . 8
7.2.1 General feature models . 8
7.2.2 Feature models .14
7.2.3 Attribute models .17
7.2.4 Relationship models .23
7.2.5 Album and dataset structure .26
8 Application schemas — GDF Catalogues .27
8.1 The Feature Catalogue .27
8.1.1 Analysis .27
8.1.2 Consideration of options .29
8.1.3 Recommendation and expected impact .29
8.2 The Attribute Catalogue .30
8.2.1 Analysis .30
8.2.2 Consideration of options .33
8.2.3 Recommendation and expected impact .33
8.3 The Relationship Catalogue .33
8.3.1 Analysis .33
8.3.2 Consideration of options .34
8.3.3 Recommendation and expected impact .34
8.4 The Metadata Catalogue .35
8.4.1 Analysis .35
8.4.2 Consideration of options .35
8.4.3 Recommendation and expected impact .36
9 Encoding rules .36
9.1 Analysis.36
9.2 Consideration of options .37
9.3 Recommendation and expected impact .37
10 Other issues arising .38
10.1 Introduction .38
10.2 Temporal referencing .38
10.3 Geodetic location referencing .38
Annex A (informative) Comparison of terms and definitions in ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211 .39
Bibliography .59
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved iii

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www .iso .org/ directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www .iso .org/ patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www .iso .org/
iso/ foreword .html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 211, Geographic information/Geomatics.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www .iso .org/ members .html.
iv © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

Introduction
0.1 Background
From the start, GDF (Geographic Data Files) was based on similar geospatial concepts as ISO/TC 211
standards (the ISO 19100 family of standards). Over the years, GDF has been specified to provide
data structures to support a range of transport-related applications and in-car navigation systems.
GDF forms the basis of today's solutions used by TomTom, HERE and other navigational systems. The
ISO 19100 family of standards created by ISO/TC211 remain the conceptual basis for general geospatial
purposes. The basic concepts standards of the ISO 19100 family do not support any specific application
domains but have been widely adopted by the geospatial industry; ISO/TC211 standards also underpin
key European legislation such as the INSPIRE Directive.
With the emergence of increasingly connected and automated road vehicles, there is a need to share
geospatial information between the vehicle’s navigational and contextual awareness systems and the
mapping and road authorities (the road-side actors). The exchange of map-data between these actors
requires extensive interpretations and transformation rules to make sure that the map-data in the on-
board car navigation systems is aligned with that of the road-side actors, and that exchanges of data
robustly support safety and efficiency applications in an unambiguous, coherent way.
GDF continues to be developed to adapt to the requirements of road vehicle automation, as well as wider
domains of application, such as public transport, geospatial and navigation data. A lack of alignment
between GDF key concepts and those of ISO/TC211 standards reduces the collective efficacy of the
combined standards, increases the complexity of utilizing standards-conformant data in an efficient
manner and increases the risk and threats arising from ineffective conversions. This is not efficient,
and is mostly due to the lack of harmonization between the conceptual models of GDF and ISO/TC 211
standards.
Both models are in extensive use: GDF in the vehicle in-car navigation industry and the ISO 19100 family
of standards in the geospatial industry and with public authorities worldwide. Thus, it is not a non-
disruptive option for one group of actors to switch to the other base of standards – nor indeed are these
standards directly functionally equivalent. Therefore, the work underpinning this document aims to
identify the gaps between the two concepts and suggest ways to bridge them.
First, there is a need to perform a gap analysis, and then after that, suggest means to bridge the gap
and finally decide how to create standards or application schemas to accommodate the harmonization
that is necessary. The identification of opportunities to adjust concepts to align GDF and ISO/TC 211
concepts supports the need to achieve an improved interoperability of road and vehicle data systems,
and geospatial datasets in wider usage.
Within this document, comparative analysis and recommendations are provided. At a broad level,
the analysis and recommendations suggest modifications to GDF to make an ISO 19100 family-based
application schema in order to:
— make GDF ready to accommodate automated vehicles with support from ISO/TC 211;
— enable map data exchange between all actors (car makers, map makers, mapping authorities and
road owners);
— align with ISO/TC 211-based standards and related technology used by European institutions,
directives, CEN and in European-wide platforms like TN-ITS and DATEX II, and international
stakeholder groups such as TISA.
During the development of this document, various iterations of the GDF have been used and reviewed.
The current published version of GDF, known as GDF v5.1, Part 1, has been published as ISO 20524-1,
published 2020-03-30, and ISO 20524-2, published 2020-11-30. These documents revise the previously
used ISO 14825:2011, known as GDF v5.0. ISO 14825:2011 has been withdrawn. The analysis within
this document uses GDF v5.1 (ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2) as a reference baseline.
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved v

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

0.2 Overview of recommendations
0.2.1 General
This subclause brings together the recommendations that have been made throughout the body of
this document. Each recommendation is summarized; in each case the reader is advised to review the
relevant referenced clause for the full explanation. Also, in each case, the primary actor expected to
address the recommendation is listed.
0.2.2 Model structure
See subclauses 7.1 and 7.2.1.
A more specific modularization of GDF according to the structure of the ISO 19100 family of standards
is recommended to simplify maintenance, revision and reuse of the concepts in the document. Specified
relations between the GDF Overall Conceptual Data Model and concepts from the ISO 19100 family of
standards is recommended to improve interoperability and reduce the need for specific GDF concepts.
It is recommended that the generic feature model and the feature catalogue model in the GDF GDM be
divided into specific models for a Generic Feature Exchange Model and a Feature Catalogue Model. The
models are recommended to be defined as application schemas according to ISO 19109 and prepared
for model-driven implementation.
There is a need for further studies on how to define the belt concept and the location referencing of GDF
features in general in terms of ISO/TC 211 standards.
There is a need to achieve a greater clarity of linear referencing of belts.
To be addressed by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.3 General Conceptual Models
See subclause 7.2.
It is recommended that the internal GDF stereotypes “Feature”, “Attribute” and “Relationship” be
replaced with the ISO 19109 stereotype “FeatureType”.
The core classes Feature and Attribute are recommended to be used only in the Generic Feature
Exchange Model, while a specific superclass for feature classes is recommended to be used in the
Feature, Attribute and Relationship Catalogues. The core Relationship class can be removed from the
GDF GDM.
The conceptual models for attribute types and attribute values are recommended to be defined as
metamodels to achieve an improved structure with a specified level of abstraction for concepts in
the GDF model. The metamodels ought to extend the ISO 19109 GFM in order to achieve improved
interoperability with models in, or based on, the ISO 19100 family.
It is recommended that the definition of a Feature in GDF be modified to include real-world phenomena
that are not physical. Furthermore, it is recommended that classes for logical placement be evaluated
and possibly changed to location referencing classes.
The album and dataset model are recommended to be defined in an application schema according to
rules in ISO 19109. The model ought to include the data organization structure and the generic feature
exchange model. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204.
0.2.4 The GDF Catalogues
See Clause 8.
It is recommended that the GDF Feature, Attribute and Relationship Catalogues be modelled as
application schemas according to rules in ISO 19109. The GDF Metadata Catalogue is recommended to
be modelled as a part of the model for album and dataset, with reuse of elements defined in ISO 19115-1.
vi © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

It is recommended that a core superclass to replace the use of the classes Feature, Attribute and
Relationship in the Feature, Attribute and Relationship Catalogues be defined.
The listing of unique IDs in ISO 20524-1:2020, A.1, A.2 and A.3 ought to be a report from the UML model,
in order to maintain consistency. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204.
0.2.5 Encoding rules
It is recommended that GML implementation schemas for GDF be derived from the GDF application
schemas. In order to enable handling of requirements for attribute content in GML, it is recommended
that ISO/TC 211 seek to revise or amend ISO 19109 and ISO 19136-1 to facilitate such requirements.
If the two existing implementation encodings (MRS and GDF-XML) are to be maintained, specified
conversion rules ought to be defined in order to enable conversions from the UML model. To be
addressed by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.6 Aligning terminology
Annex A illustrates a continued difference between the definition of defined terms found in the GDF
standards (ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2) or ISO/TC 204 and definitions found in the ISO 19100 family
of standards from ISO/TC 211. It is recommended that ISO/TC 211 lead activities to seek improved
harmonization of defined terms and their definitions across the TCs. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204
and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.7 Aligning GDF time domain syntax with other ISO standards
It is recommended that a detailed analysis of the syntax characteristics supported by GDF and
a comparison to the characteristics offered by the ISO 8601 series and ISO 19108 be undertaken in
advance of preparation of future revisions of GDF (ISO 20524 series), with the aim of adopting ISO 8601
series and ISO 19108 conformant syntax mechanisms. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.8 Adding epoch value to dynamic coordinate reference system in GDF
Concern has been raised that GDF needs to differentiate between the use of 'static' and 'dynamic'
coordinate reference systems, and add the epoch value in referencing to 'dynamic' CRS. To be addressed
by ISO/TC 204.
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved vii

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)
Geographic Information — Gap-analysis: mapping and
describing the differences between the current GDF
and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models to suggest ways to
harmonize and resolve conflicting issues
1 Scope
This document maps and describes the differences between GDF (ISO 20524 series), from ISO/TC 204,
and conceptual models from the ISO 19100 family, from ISO/TC 211, and suggests ways to harmonize
and resolve issues of conflict.
Throughout this document, reference to GDF refers to GDF v5.1, ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2, unless
expressly identified otherwise. Where necessary, reference will be made to Part 1 or Part 2.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
No terms and definitions are listed in this document.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
NOTE Geospatial terms occurring in ISO/TC 211 standards can also be found in https:// isotc211 .geolexica
[21]
.org/ .
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms
The following abbreviated terms apply:
ADAS advanced driver assistance systems
CRS coordinate reference system
GDF GDM geographic data files general data model
GDF geographic data files
GFM general feature model
GIS geographic information system
GML geography markup language
HD high definition
ITS intelligent transport systems
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved 1

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

MC&G mapping, charting and geodesy
MDA model driven architecture
MRS media record structure
OEM(s) original equipment manufacturer(s)
OWL web ontology language
POI point of interest
UML unified modelling language
DIGEST digital geographic information exchange standard
5 Comparing terms and definitions
Throughout the later clauses of this document there is discussion concerning a comparison and
recommendations for improved alignment of the defined terms and their definitions used in GDF and
the ISO 19100 family.
In addition, Annex A provides a revised and updated version of a comparison of terms and definitions
found in GDF and the ISO 19100 family presented in a tabular form. The basis for the content of Annex A
is drawn from ISO 19132:2007, Annex E. This content has been updated to both reflect current terms
and definitions found in the latest available editions of GDF and standards within the ISO 19100 family.
Where the recommendations made in this document would result in modification of these defined
terms and definitions, these are highlighted.
6 Business considerations
Geospatial datasets have hugely widescale application across every sector of commerce, industry and
society. As such, the underpinning and interoperability provided by conformance to the geospatial
standards defined by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211 in conjunction with OGC, the Open Geospatial
Consortium, provide key tools for interoperability. These standards are widely adopted within the
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) domains and within Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and
geographic-enabled software and systems across many domains respectively.
Geospatial datasets relating to road networks are used for a very wide range of purposes, for example,
navigation, asset management, network management, incident response, road design, drainage, acoustic
propagation, land use planning and access planning, to name a few. Importantly, like other transport
networks, road networks significantly interface and interact with other non-highway features, such
as end-point destinations, POI gazetteers, footways, rights of way, soft estate, rail and water networks,
points of access, public transport interfaces, etc. Coherence of the standards underpinning all of these
geospatial data sets is important for interoperability and cross-domain interactions, analysis and
applications and services.
Within road networks, and the domain of ITS, detailed geospatial information that represents road
networks and the surrounding road environment is a critical component for route planning and
navigation. Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and systems for automated driving depend
on accurate and updated geospatial information from a variety of sources for the complete knowledge
needed for legal and safe navigation. Modern road vehicles are increasingly equipped with sensor
technologies. The outputs from these on-board sensors, and other sensors at the roadside, can be used
to generate and create local contextual geospatial knowledge, and can share this information with
map providers, Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and other road users. This sensor-derived
data can be very transitory and dynamic in nature, or can indicate detection of permanent change.
However, the local knowledge is neither sufficient for route planning nor for local navigation under
challenging conditions, such as fog or snow-covered roads, or where road maintenance activities such
2 © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

as road closures are present; it needs to be combined with geospatial information from pre-processed
databases covering larger areas.
Commercial map providers and OEMs create and deliver ITS databases and services for the users of
ITS applications for route planning, navigation and other services. These products and services are
being extended to support ADAS and automated driving with higher integrity map data, so-called
High Definition (HD) maps. Map providers and OEMs need reliable and harmonized mechanisms that
can provide them with information from authorities and other sources for further sharing with the
road users, and for simulation and testing. Sharing information from authorities can improve the
data quality of ITS databases for route planning and navigation and thereby improve public safety,
reduce the risk of damage to infrastructure, improve strategic use of the road network and improve
the quality of mobility services. To enable the flow of information, models that describe the real world
and specifications for information exchange are needed; the harmonization and consistency of these
models and specifications, ought to reduce translation losses and errors, and improve opportunities for
service developments to reach the widest audiences possible.
7 Reference model
7.1 General structure
7.1.1 Analysis
A standardized methodology for information modelling is a core foundation for a digital representation
of real-world features and events. The ISO 19100 family from ISO/TC 211, as well as GDF from
ISO/TC 204, are based on the approach described in ISO 19103 and illustrated in Figure 1: a portion of
the real world, referred to as the universe of discourse, is perceived in a specific context (e.g. geographic
application in general, or navigation specifically) and defined in a conceptual model. The conceptual
model is formally described and represented in a conceptual schema. The conceptual schema is
described by use of a conceptual schema language. For this purpose, both GDF and the ISO 19100 family
[10]
apply the Unified Modelling Language (UML) .
Figure 1 — Information modelling (adapted from ISO 19103)
The standards in the ISO 19100 family are based on the concepts of a Model-Driven Architecture
[11]
(MDA) and a specific use of UML defined in the UML profile in ISO 19103 and the General Feature
Model (GFM) defined in ISO 19109. The founding principle in MDA is that models (represented in
schemas) are defined for different levels of abstraction. Furthermore, the conceptual schemas are
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved 3

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

independent of specific implementation technologies. This brings benefits of being able to create
multiple technology-dependent implementations from common abstract models.
ISO 19103 defines four levels of abstraction for the use of MD
...

TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 19169
First edition
Geographic Information — Gap-
analysis: mapping and describing the
differences between the current GDF
and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models
to suggest ways to harmonize and
resolve conflicting issues
PROOF/ÉPREUVE
Reference number
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)
©
ISO 2021

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
© ISO 2021
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting
on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address
below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii PROOF/ÉPREUVE © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms . 1
5 Comparing terms and definitions . 2
6 Business considerations . 2
7 Reference model . 3
7.1 General structure . 3
7.1.1 Analysis . 3
7.1.2 Consideration of options . 5
7.1.3 Recommendation and expected impact . 6
7.2 General Conceptual Models . 8
7.2.1 General feature models . 8
7.2.2 Feature models .14
7.2.3 Attribute models .17
7.2.4 Relationship models .23
7.2.5 Album and dataset structure .26
8 Application schemas — GDF Catalogues .27
8.1 The Feature Catalogue .27
8.1.1 Analysis .27
8.1.2 Consideration of options .29
8.1.3 Recommendation and expected impact .29
8.2 The Attribute Catalogue .30
8.2.1 Analysis .30
8.2.2 Consideration of options .33
8.2.3 Recommendation and expected impact .33
8.3 The Relationship Catalogue .33
8.3.1 Analysis .33
8.3.2 Consideration of options .34
8.3.3 Recommendation and expected impact .34
8.4 The Metadata Catalogue .35
8.4.1 Analysis .35
8.4.2 Consideration of options .35
8.4.3 Recommendation and expected impact .36
9 Encoding rules .36
9.1 Analysis.36
9.2 Consideration of options .37
9.3 Recommendation and expected impact .37
10 Other issues arising .38
10.1 Introduction .38
10.2 Temporal referencing .38
10.3 Geodetic location referencing .38
Annex A (informative) Comparison of terms and definitions in ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211 .39
Bibliography .59
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved PROOF/ÉPREUVE iii

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www .iso .org/ directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www .iso .org/ patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www .iso .org/
iso/ foreword .html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 211, Geographic information/Geomatics.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www .iso .org/ members .html.
iv PROOF/ÉPREUVE © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

Introduction
0.1 Background
From the start, GDF (Geographic Data Files) was based on similar geospatial concepts as ISO/TC 211
standards (the ISO 19100 family of standards). Over the years, GDF has been specified to provide
data structures to support a range of transport-related applications and in-car navigation systems.
GDF forms the basis of today's solutions used by TomTom, HERE and other navigational systems. The
ISO 19100 family of standards created by ISO/TC211 remain the conceptual basis for general geospatial
purposes. The basic concepts standards of the ISO 19100 family do not support any specific application
domains but have been widely adopted by the geospatial industry; ISO/TC211 standards also underpin
key European legislation such as the INSPIRE Directive.
With the emergence of increasingly connected and automated road vehicles, there is a need to share
geospatial information between the vehicle’s navigational and contextual awareness systems and the
mapping and road authorities (the road-side actors). The exchange of map-data between these actors
requires extensive interpretations and transformation rules to make sure that the map-data in the on-
board car navigation systems is aligned with that of the road-side actors, and that exchanges of data
robustly support safety and efficiency applications in an unambiguous, coherent way.
GDF continues to be developed to adapt to the requirements of road vehicle automation, as well as wider
domains of application, such as public transport, geospatial and navigation data. A lack of alignment
between GDF key concepts and those of ISO/TC211 standards reduces the collective efficacy of the
combined standards, increases the complexity of utilizing standards-conformant data in an efficient
manner and increases the risk and threats arising from ineffective conversions. This is not efficient,
and is mostly due to the lack of harmonization between the conceptual models of GDF and ISO/TC 211
standards.
Both models are in extensive use: GDF in the vehicle in-car navigation industry and the ISO 19100 family
of standards in the geospatial industry and with public authorities worldwide. Thus, it is not a non-
disruptive option for one group of actors to switch to the other base of standards – nor indeed are these
standards directly functionally equivalent. Therefore, the work underpinning this document aims to
identify the gaps between the two concepts and suggest ways to bridge them.
First, there is a need to perform a gap analysis, and then after that, suggest means to bridge the gap
and finally decide how to create standards or application schemas to accommodate the harmonization
that is necessary. The identification of opportunities to adjust concepts to align GDF and ISO/TC 211
concepts supports the need to achieve an improved interoperability of road and vehicle data systems,
and geospatial datasets in wider usage.
Within this document, comparative analysis and recommendations are provided. At a broad level,
the analysis and recommendations suggest modifications to GDF to make an ISO 19100 family-based
application schema in order to:
— Make GDF ready to accommodate automated vehicles with support from ISO/TC 211;
— Enable map data exchange between all actors (car makers, map makers, mapping authorities and
road owners);
— Align with ISO/TC 211-based standards and related technology used by European institutions,
directives, CEN and in European-wide platforms like TN-ITS and DATEX II, and international
stakeholder groups such as TISA.
During the development of this document, various iterations of the GDF have been used and reviewed.
The current published version of GDF, known as GDF v5.1, Part 1, has been published as ISO 20524-1,
published 2020-03-30, and ISO 20524-2, published 2020-11-30. These documents revise the previously
used ISO 14825:2011, known as GDF v5.0. ISO 14825:2011 has been withdrawn. The analysis within
this document uses GDF v5.1 (ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2) as a reference baseline.
0.2 Overview of recommendations
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved PROOF/ÉPREUVE v

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

0.2.1 General
This subclause brings together the recommendations that have been made throughout the body of
this document. Each recommendation is summarized; in each case the reader is advised to review the
relevant referenced clause for the full explanation. Also, in each case, the primary actor expected to
address the recommendation is listed.
0.2.2 Model structure
See subclauses 7.1 and 7.2.1.
A more specific modularization of GDF according to the structure of the ISO 19100 family of standards
is recommended to simplify maintenance, revision and reuse of the concepts in the document. Specified
relations between the GDF Overall Conceptual Data Model and concepts from the ISO 19100 family of
standards is recommended to improve interoperability and reduce the need for specific GDF concepts.
It is recommended that the generic feature model and the feature catalogue model in the GDF GDM be
divided into specific models for a Generic Feature Exchange Model and a Feature Catalogue Model. The
models are recommended to be defined as application schemas according to ISO 19109 and prepared
for model-driven implementation.
There is a need for further studies on how to define the belt concept and the location referencing of GDF
features in general in terms of ISO/TC 211 standards.
There is a need to achieve a greater clarity of linear referencing of belts.
To be addressed by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.3 General Conceptual Models
See subclause 7.2.
It is recommended that the internal GDF stereotypes “Feature”, “Attribute” and “Relationship” be
replaced with the ISO 19109 stereotype “FeatureType”.
The core classes Feature and Attribute are recommended to be used only in the Generic Feature
Exchange Model, while a specific superclass for feature classes is recommended to be used in the
Feature, Attribute and Relationship Catalogues. The core Relationship class can be removed from the
GDF GDM.
The conceptual models for attribute types and attribute values are recommended to be defined as
metamodels to achieve an improved structure with a specified level of abstraction for concepts in
the GDF model. The metamodels ought to extend the ISO 19109 GFM in order to achieve improved
interoperability with models in, or based on, the ISO 19100 family.
It is recommended that the definition of a Feature in GDF be modified to include real-world phenomena
that are not physical. Furthermore, it is recommended that classes for logical placement be evaluated
and possibly changed to location referencing classes.
The album and dataset model are recommended to be defined in an application schema according to
rules in ISO 19109. The model ought to include the data organization structure and the generic feature
exchange model. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204.
0.2.4 The GDF Catalogues
See Clause 8.
It is recommended that the GDF Feature, Attribute and Relationship Catalogues be modelled as
application schemas according to rules in ISO 19109. The GDF Metadata Catalogue is recommended to
be modelled as a part of the model for album and dataset, with reuse of elements defined in ISO 19115-1.
It is recommended that a core superclass to replace the use of the classes Feature, Attribute and
Relationship in the Feature, Attribute and Relationship Catalogues be defined.
vi PROOF/ÉPREUVE © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

The listing of unique IDs in ISO 20524-1:2020, A.1, A.2 and A.3 ought to be a report from the UML model,
in order to maintain consistency. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204.
0.2.5 Encoding rules
It is recommended that GML implementation schemas for GDF be derived from the GDF application
schemas. In order to enable handling of requirements for attribute content in GML, it is recommended
that ISO/TC 211 seek to revise or amend ISO 19109 and ISO 19136-1 to facilitate such requirements.
If the two existing implementation encodings (MRS and GDF-XML) are to be maintained, specified
conversion rules ought to be defined in order to enable conversions from the UML model. To be
addressed by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.6 Aligning terminology
Annex A illustrates a continued difference between the definition of defined terms found in the GDF
standards (ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2) or ISO/TC 204 and definitions found in the ISO 19100 family
of standards from ISO/TC 211. It is recommended that ISO/TC 211 lead activities to seek improved
harmonization of defined terms and their definitions across the TCs. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204
and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.7 Aligning GDF time domain syntax with other ISO standards
It is recommended that a detailed analysis of the syntax characteristics supported by GDF and
a comparison to the characteristics offered by the ISO 8601 series and ISO 19108 be undertaken in
advance of preparation of future revisions of GDF (ISO 20524 series), with the aim of adopting ISO 8601
series and ISO 19108 conformant syntax mechanisms. To be addressed by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211.
0.2.8 Adding epoch value to dynamic coordinate reference system in GDF
Concern has been raised that GDF needs to differentiate between the use of 'static' and 'dynamic'
coordinate reference systems, and add the epoch value in referencing to 'dynamic' CRS. To be addressed
by ISO/TC 204.
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved PROOF/ÉPREUVE vii

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)
Geographic Information — Gap-analysis: mapping and
describing the differences between the current GDF
and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models to suggest ways to
harmonize and resolve conflicting issues
1 Scope
This document maps and describes the differences between GDF (ISO 20524 series), from ISO/TC 204,
and conceptual models from the ISO 19100 family, from ISO/TC 211, and suggests ways to harmonize
and resolve issues of conflict.
Throughout this document, reference to GDF refers to GDF v5.1, ISO 20524-1 and ISO 20524-2, unless
expressly identified otherwise. Where necessary, reference will be made to Part 1 or Part 2.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
No terms and definitions are listed in this document.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
NOTE Geospatial terms occurring in ISO/TC 211 standards can also be found in https:// isotc211 .geolexica
[21].
.org/
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms
The following abbreviated terms apply:
ADAS advanced driver assistance systems
CRS coordinate reference system
GDF GDM geographic data files general data model
GDF geographic data files
GFM general feature model
GIS geographic information system
GML geography markup language
HD high definition
ITS intelligent transport systems
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved PROOF/ÉPREUVE 1

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

MC&G mapping, charting and geodesy
MDA model driven architecture
MRS media record structure
OEM(s) original equipment manufacturer(s)
OWL web ontology language
POI point of interest
UML unified modelling language
DIGEST digital geographic information exchange standard
5 Comparing terms and definitions
Throughout the later clauses of this document there is discussion concerning a comparison and
recommendations for improved alignment of the defined terms and their definitions used in GDF and
the ISO 19100 family.
In addition, Annex A provides a revised and updated version of a comparison of terms and definitions
found in GDF and the ISO 19100 family presented in a tabular form. The basis for the content of Annex A
is drawn from ISO 19132:2007, Annex E. This content has been updated to both reflect current terms
and definitions found in the latest available editions of GDF and standards within the ISO 19100 family.
Where the recommendations made in this document would result in modification of these defined
terms and definitions, these are highlighted.
6 Business considerations
Geospatial datasets have hugely widescale application across every sector of commerce, industry and
society. As such, the underpinning and interoperability provided by conformance to the geospatial
standards defined by ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211 in conjunction with OGC, the Open Geospatial
Consortium, provide key tools for interoperability. These standards are widely adopted within the
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) domains and within Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and
geographic-enabled software and systems across many domains respectively.
Geospatial datasets relating to road networks are used for a very wide range of purposes, for example,
navigation, asset management, network management, incident response, road design, drainage, acoustic
propagation, land use planning and access planning, to name a few. Importantly, like other transport
networks, road networks significantly interface and interact with other non-highway features, such
as end-point destinations, POI gazetteers, footways, rights of way, soft estate, rail and water networks,
points of access, public transport interfaces, etc. Coherence of the standards underpinning all of these
geospatial data sets is important for interoperability and cross-domain interactions, analysis and
applications and services.
Within road networks, and the domain of ITS, detailed geospatial information that represents road
networks and the surrounding road environment is a critical component for route planning and
navigation. Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and systems for automated driving depend
on accurate and updated geospatial information from a variety of sources for the complete knowledge
needed for legal and safe navigation. Modern road vehicles are increasingly equipped with sensor
technologies. The outputs from these on-board sensors, and other sensors at the roadside, can be used
to generate and create local contextual geospatial knowledge, and can share this information with
map providers, Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and other road users. This sensor-derived
data can be very transitory and dynamic in nature, or can indicate detection of permanent change.
However, the local knowledge is neither sufficient for route planning nor for local navigation under
challenging conditions, such as fog or snow-covered roads, or where road maintenance activities such
2 PROOF/ÉPREUVE © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

as road closures are present; it needs to be combined with geospatial information from pre-processed
databases covering larger areas.
Commercial map providers and OEMs create and deliver ITS databases and services for the users of
ITS applications for route planning, navigation and other services. These products and services are
being extended to support ADAS and automated driving with higher integrity map data, so-called
High Definition (HD) maps. Map providers and OEMs need reliable and harmonized mechanisms that
can provide them with information from authorities and other sources for further sharing with the
road users, and for simulation and testing. Sharing information from authorities can improve the
data quality of ITS databases for route planning and navigation and thereby improve public safety,
reduce the risk of damage to infrastructure, improve strategic use of the road network and improve
the quality of mobility services. To enable the flow of information, models that describe the real world
and specifications for information exchange are needed; the harmonization and consistency of these
models and specifications, ought to reduce translation losses and errors, and improve opportunities for
service developments to reach the widest audiences possible.
7 Reference model
7.1 General structure
7.1.1 Analysis
A standardized methodology for information modelling is a core foundation for a digital representation
of real-world features and events. The ISO 19100 family from ISO/TC 211, as well as GDF from
ISO/TC 204, are based on the approach described in ISO 19103 and illustrated in Figure 1: a portion of
the real world, referred to as the universe of discourse, is perceived in a specific context (e.g. geographic
application in general, or navigation specifically) and defined in a conceptual model. The conceptual
model is formally described and represented in a conceptual schema. The conceptual schema is
described by use of a conceptual schema language. For this purpose, both GDF and the ISO 19100 family
[10]
apply the Unified Modelling Language (UML) .
Figure 1 — Information modelling (adapted from ISO 19103)
The standards in the ISO 19100 family are based on the concepts of a Model-Driven Architecture (MDA)
[11]
and a specific use of UML defined in the UML profile in ISO 19103 and the General Feature Model
(GFM) defined in ISO 19109. The founding principle in MDA is that models (represented in schemas)
are defined for different levels of abstraction. Furthermore, the conceptual schemas are independent of
© ISO 2021 – All rights reserved PROOF/ÉPREUVE 3

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
ISO/TR 19169:2021(E)

specific implementation technologies. This brings benefits of being able to create multiple technol
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.