Advertisement

A Javascript Decoder for CitySAC in 3D SDI Web Transaction

  • Siew Chengxi BernadEmail author
  • Alias Abdul Rahman
  • Mohd Latif bin Zainal
  • Fuziah binti Abu Hanifah
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

Sharing of spatial data using internet is getting common as seen in various developments in Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI). Spatial data sharing requires standardized file format for interoperability which could be seen in different working groups in Geography Mark-up Language (GML) and CityGML where different level of details (LOD) is described in CityGML for 3D city. In order to solve the large dataset problem that arises due to XML describ-able advantage used in CityGML, a schema-aware encoder (CitySAC) is invented and achieved better compression ratio and required lesser time, compared to the novel Lemper-Zipf-Markov (LZMA) algorithm. Since geometries and semantics data are required in data transaction over the web services especially for analysis, the use case of the proprietor schema-aware encoder is defined. The advantage of the decoder is the availability for code-on-demand. This chapter discusses brief introduction of the schema-aware development background as well as the related works; the development of javascript decoder to solve the interoperability issue in implementing CitySAC over the open web environment as well as the example application.

Keywords

3D SDI Javascript Decoder XML CityGML 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to convey our deepest acknowledgement to Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE), Malaysia for the scholarship under the program MyPhD, MyBrain15 and enabling us to carry out this research project.

References

  1. Alliez P, Desburn M (2001) Valence-driven connectivity encoding for 3D meshes. In: Proceedings of the Eurographics ‘01Google Scholar
  2. Augeri Christophe J, Mullins Barry E, Bulutonglu Dursun A, Baldwin Rusty O, Baird III Leemon C (2001) An analysis of XML compression efficiency. In: Proceedings of the workshop on experimental computer science (EXPCS), San Diego, CA, 13–14 June 2007. 978-1-59593-751-3/07/06Google Scholar
  3. ASN.1: Fast infoset (2005) Series X: data networks, open system communications and security, ITU-T X.891, Telecommunication standardization sector of ITUGoogle Scholar
  4. Basanow J, Pascal N, Neubauer S, Schilling A, Zipf A (2008) Towards 3D spatial data infrastructures (3D-SDI) based on open standards—experiences, results and future issues. In: Oosterom P et al (ed) Advances in 3D geoinformation systems (2008) Springer, Berlin, pp 65–86Google Scholar
  5. Christensen AF, Lutz M, Ostlander N, Bernard L (2007) Designing service architectures for distributed geoprocessing. Trans GIS 11(6):799–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deering M (1995) Geometry compression. In: SIGGRAPH ‘95 proceedings of the 22nd annual conference on computer graphics and interactive techniquesGoogle Scholar
  7. Galip A (2007) Service oriented architecture for geographic information systems supporting real time data grids, Dissertation. Department of Computer Science, Indiana UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Gazdzicki J, Linsenbarth A (2004) 10th EC GI & GIS Workshop, ESDI State of the Art, WarsawGoogle Scholar
  9. Isenburg M, Snoeyin J (2000) Spirale reversi: reverse decoding of edgebreaker encoding. In: Proceeding of 12th Canadian conference on computational geometryGoogle Scholar
  10. Isenburg M (2013) LAZzip: Lossless compression of LiDAR data. ASPRS J 79(2):209–217 Google Scholar
  11. Kolbe TH, Gerhard K, Nagel C, Stadler A (2008) 3D Geodatabase Berlin version 2.0.1a, Fachgebiet Methodik der Geoinformationstechnik der TU BerlinGoogle Scholar
  12. Lanig S, Zipf A (2010) Proposal for a web processing services (WPS) application profile for 3D processing analysis. In: IEEE second international conference on advanced geographic information systems, applications, and services, pp 117–122. 978-0-7695-3951-5/10Google Scholar
  13. Li W (2003) Xcomp: an XML compression tool. Diss. University of Waterloo, School of Computer ScienceGoogle Scholar
  14. Lia P, Lan W, Xiao X (2008) Sdi in China:progress and issues. In: The international archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences, vol XXXVII Part B4. BeijingGoogle Scholar
  15. Liefke H, Suciu D (1999) XMill: an efficient compressor for XML data. http://sourceforge.net/projects/xmill. Accessed 05 May 2012
  16. Min J, Park M, Chung C (2003) XPRESS: a queriable compression for XML Data. In: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of dataGoogle Scholar
  17. Ng W, Lam WY, Wood PT, Levene M (2006) XCQ: A queriable XML compression system. Knowl Inf Syst 10(4):421–452 (Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006)Google Scholar
  18. Oracle Sun, Fast Infoset Documentation (2005). http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/xml/fastinfoset/. Accessed 01 March 2011
  19. Peng J, Chang-Su Kim, Jay Kuo C.-C (2005) Technologies for 3D mesh compression: a survey. J Vis Commun Image R 16:688–733Google Scholar
  20. Rossignac J (1999) Edgebreaker: connectivity compression for triangle meshes, GVU Technical report GIT-GVU-98-35Google Scholar
  21. Siew CB, Alias AR (2013) A schema-aware encoder for putrajaya 3d, urban and regional data management. In: Proceedings of the urban data management society symposium 2013 (UDMS), pp 181–190Google Scholar
  22. Stollberg B, Zipf A (2007) OGC web processing service interface for web service orchestration. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  23. Szymczak A, Rossignac J (1999) Wrap and zip decompression of the connectivity of triangle meshes compressed with Edgebreaker. Comput Geom 14(1–3):119–135Google Scholar
  24. Taubin G, Horn W, Lazarus F, Rossignac J (1998) Geometry coding and VRML. Proc IEEE 86(6):1228–1243Google Scholar
  25. Tolani P, Harista J (2002) XGrind: a query-friendly XML compressor. In: International conference on data engineering (ICDE), pp 225–234Google Scholar
  26. Touma C, Gotsman C (1998) Triangle mesh compression. Graphics interface 98 conference proceedings, pp 26–34Google Scholar
  27. Walenciak G, Stollberg B, Neubauer S, Zipf A (2009) Extending spatial data infrastructures 3D by geoprocessing functionality—3D simulations in disaster management and environmental research. Advanced Geographic Information Systems & Web Services, 2009. GEOWS '09. International Conference on, 40(44): 1−7. doi: 10.1109/GEOWS.2009.16

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siew Chengxi Bernad
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alias Abdul Rahman
    • 1
  • Mohd Latif bin Zainal
    • 2
  • Fuziah binti Abu Hanifah
    • 2
  1. 1.3D GIS Research Lab, Faculty of Geoinformation Science and Real EstateUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM)Johor BahruMalaysia
  2. 2.Malaysian Centre for Geospatial Data Infrastructure (MaCGDI), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (NRE)PutrajayaMalaysia

Personalised recommendations