DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-68566-1_24
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The IGN-E Case: Integrating Through a Hidden Ontology

Abstract: National Geographic Institute of Spain (IGN-E) wanted to integrate its main information sources for building a common vocabulary reference and thus to manage the huge amount of information it held. The main problem of this integration is the great heterogeneity of data sources. The Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) is working with IGN-E to attain this objective in two phases: first, by creating automatically an ontology using the semantics of catalogues sections, and second, by discovering mappings automaticall… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
7

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
6
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…National mapping agencies have worked on the development of ontologies describing cartographic objects (Gómez-Pérez et al, 2008). However, these ontologies focus on data integration from different sources and do not provide a formal description for reasoning.…”
Section: Landform Ontologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…National mapping agencies have worked on the development of ontologies describing cartographic objects (Gómez-Pérez et al, 2008). However, these ontologies focus on data integration from different sources and do not provide a formal description for reasoning.…”
Section: Landform Ontologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing work in this domain consists in the establishment of a core reference or a domain ontology collecting and formalising knowledge gathered from experts. Major sources of landform taxonomy are provided by spatial data standards such as SDTS and by national mapping agencies such as the IGN-E in Spain [5] and the Ordnance Survey in the UK 3 . Proposed ontologies rely on several ontologies including a topographic ontology and a hydrologic ontology.…”
Section: Landform Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The purpose of the document is to set a standard for communication (the terminology is available in several languages) and for the denomination of undersea features (with a guideline for naming features). Although this document is only a terminology with definitions in natural language, it defines a standard, classifies more terms and provides more precise definitions than the Geo-Wordnet 4 database or USGS's SDTS 5 . Therefore this document provides a uniform view of undersea features solving most semantic difficulties [9] and is used as a base for the definition of the ontology of submarine features.…”
Section: Landform Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing works on ontologies in cartography are of two kinds and were mainly conducted by national mapping agencies. On one hand, domain ontologies describing the knowledge portrayed on the map were designed by the Spanish mapping agency (IGN-E) (Gómez-Pérez et al, 2008) and the Ordnance Survey in the UK 1 . Both ontologies rely on several ontologies including a topographic ontology and a hydrological ontology.…”
Section: Ontologies For Cartographic Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%