Landmarks in OpenLS — A Data Structure for Cognitive Ergonomic Route Directions

  • Stefan Hansen
  • Kai-Florian Richter
  • Alexander Klippel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4197)


Landmarks support the structuring of environmental information into cognitive conceptual units, they have the potential to identify uniquely pertinent intersections for route following, and they disambiguate spatial situations at complex intersections. Not using them in automatically generated route directions is a violation of cognitive ergonomics. While we have made great progress on the one hand in characterizing and on the other hand in mining potential landmarks, viable data structures that incorporate their cognitive conceptual functions in route directions are poorly developed. The present article closes this gap by providing a representation based on the OpenLS standard that allows for capturing the semantics of landmarks. In this data structure, the cognitive conceptual essence of a landmark is represented allowing for generating route directions automatically and imbuing street network data with cognitively meaningful elements.


Spatial Relation Decision Point Spatial Cognition Salient Object Route Direction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bychowski, T.: OpenGIS Location Services (OpenLS): Part 6 – Navigation Service. OGC Implementation Specification 03-007r1 (Version 0.5.0). Open GIS Consortium Inc. (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brenner, C., Elias, B.: Extracting landmarks for car navigation systems using existing GIS databases and laser scanning. In: Proc. Photogrammetric Image Analysis, International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, München, vol. XXXIV, Part 3/W8 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Couclelis, H., Golledge, R.G., Gale, N., Tobler, W.: Exploring the anchor-point hypothesis of spatial cognition. Journal of Environmental Psychology 7(2), 99–122 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dale, R., Geldof, S., Prost, J.-P.: CORAL: Using natural language generation for navigational assistance. In: Oudshoorn, M. (ed.) Proceedings of the 26th Australasian Computer Science Conference (ACSC 2003), Adelaide, Australia (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Denis, M.: The description of routes: A cognitive approach to the production of spatial discourse. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive 16, 409–458 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Denis, M., Pazzaglia, F., Cornoldi, C., Bertolo, L.: Spatial discourse and navigation: An analysis of route directions in the city of Venice. Applied Cognitive Psychology 13, 145–174 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elias, B.: Extracting Landmarks with Data Mining Methods. In: Kuhn, W., Worboys, M.F., Timpf, S. (eds.) COSIT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2825, pp. 375–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hirtle, S.C., Jonides, J.: Evidence of Hierarchies in Cognitive Maps. Memory & Cognition 3(13), 208–217 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klippel, A.: Wayfinding Choremes. Conceptualizing Wayfinding and Route Direction Elements. Universität Bremen (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klippel, A., Tappe, H., Habel, C.: Pictorial representations of routes: Chunking route segments during comprehension. In: Freksa, C., Brauer, W., Habel, C., Wender, K.F. (eds.) Spatial Cognition III. LNCS, vol. 2685, pp. 11–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klippel, A., Hansen, S., Davies, J., Winter, S.: A High-Level Cognitive Framework For Route Directions. In: Proceedings of SSC 2005 Spatial Intelligence, Innovation and Praxis: The national biennial Conference of the Spatial Science Institute, September 2005. Spatial Science Institute, Melbourne (2005) ISBN 0-9581366-2-9Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klippel, A., Richter, K.-F., Hansen, S.: Structural salience as a landmark. In: Workshop Mobile Maps 2005, Salzburg, Austria (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klippel, A., Tappe, T., Kulik, L., Lee, P.U.: Wayfinding choremes - A language for modeling conceptual route knowledge. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 16(4), 311–329 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klippel, A., Richter, K.-F., Hansen, S.: Conceptualization of landmarks – a functional-geometric ontology (in preparation)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lynch, K.: The image of the city. MIT Press, Cambridge (1960)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maaß, W.: A cognitive model for the process of multimodal, incremental route descriptions. In: Campari, I., Frank, A.U. (eds.) COSIT 1993. LNCS, vol. 716, pp. 1–13. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mabrouk, M.: OpenGIS Location Services (OpenLS): Core Services. OGC Implementation Specification 05-016 Version 1.1. Open GIS Consortium Inc. (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mark, D.M.: Finding simple routes: ’Ease of description’ as an objective function in automated route selection. In: Proceedings, Second Symposium on Artificial Intelligence Applications (IEEE), Miami Beach, pp. 577–581 (1985)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Michon, P.-E., Denis, M.: When and why are visual landmarks used in giving directions? In: Montello, D.R. (ed.) COSIT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2205, pp. 292–305. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Presson, C.C., Montello, D.R.: Points of reference in spatial cognition: Stalking the elusive landmark. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 6, 378–381 (1988)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Raubal, M., Winter, S.: Enriching wayfinding instructions with local landmarks. In: Egenhofer, M.J., Mark, D.M. (eds.) Geographic Information Science, pp. 243–259. Springer, Berlin (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Richter, K.-F., Klippel, A.: A model for context-specific route directions. In: Freksa, C., Knauff, M., Krieg-Brückner, B., Nebel, B., Barkowsky, T. (eds.) Spatial Cognition IV. LNCS, vol. 3343, pp. 58–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Siegel, A.W., White, S.H.: The development of spatial representations of large–scale environments. In: Reese, H.W. (ed.) Advances in Child Development and Behaviour, pp. 9–55. Academic Press, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sorrows, M.E., Hirtle, S.C.: The nature of landmarks for real and electronic spaces. In: Freksa, C., Mark, D.M. (eds.) Spatial Information Theory. LNCS, vol. 1661. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tom, A., Denis, M.: Referring to landmark or street information in route directions: What difference does it make? In: Kuhn, W., Worboys, M.F., Timpf, S. (eds.) COSIT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2825, pp. 362–374. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tomko, M., Winter, S.: Reconstruction of scenes from geo-referenced web resources. In: Proceedings of SSC 2005 Spatial Intelligence, Innovation and Praxis: The National Biennial Conference of the Spatial Science Institute, Melbourne, Australia (2005)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tversky, B., Lee, P.U.: How Space Structures Language. In: Freksa, C., Habel, C., Wender, K.F. (eds.) Spatial Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Representing and Processing Spatial Knowledge. Springer, Berlin (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tversky, B., Lee, P.U.: Pictorial and verbal tools for conveying routes. In: Freksa, C., Mark, D.M. (eds.) Spatial information theory. Cognitive and computational foundations of geographic information science, pp. 51–64. Springer, Berlin (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Waller, D., Montello, D.R., Richardson, A.E., Hegarty, M.: Orientation specificity and spatial updating of memories for layouts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 28, 1051–1063 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Winter, S.: Route adaptive selection of salient features. In: Kuhn, W., Worboys, M.F., Timpf, S. (eds.) COSIT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2825, pp. 349–361. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zwaan, R.A., Radvansky, G.A.: Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin 123, 162–185 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Hansen
    • 1
  • Kai-Florian Richter
    • 1
  • Alexander Klippel
    • 2
  1. 1.Transregional Collaborative Research Center SFB/TR 8 Spatial CognitionUniversität BremenGermany
  2. 2.Cooperative Research Centre for Spatial Information, Department of GeomaticsThe University of MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations