The LandInfra standard and its role in solving the BIM-GIS quagmire

Kumar, Kavisha; Labetski, Anna; Ohori, Ken Arroyo; Ledoux, Hugo; Stoter, J.E.

doi:10.1186/s40965-019-0065-z

Cited by 41 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LandInfra and CityGML have significant similarities and differences, which we have discussed in detail in Kumar et al [30]. After comparing the two standards and analysing the individual correspondences of the classes, attributes and other concepts in the data model of LandInfra to their equivalent ones in CityGML, we found that they fit into five different categories as mentioned below.…”

Section: Mapping Between Landinfra and Citygmlmentioning

confidence: 73%

Harmonising the OGC Standards for the Built Environment: A CityGML Extension for LandInfra

Kumar

Labetski

Ohori

et al. 2019

IJGI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relatively new Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standard LandInfra documents in its data model land and civil engineering infrastructure features. It has a Geography Markup Language (GML) implementation, OGC InfraGML, which has essentially no software support and is rarely used in practice. In order to share the benefits of LandInfra (and InfraGML) with a wider public, we have created the Infra Application Domain Extension (ADE), a CityGML ADE that allows us to store LandInfra features in CityGML. In this paper, we semantically map LandInfra to CityGML, describe our ADE, and discuss a few used cases where our ADE can be useful for applications for the built environment. We also provide software to automatically convert datasets from InfraGML to CityGML (and our ADE), and vice versa, as well as to validate them, which will help practitioners generate real-world InfraGML datasets.

show abstract

Section: Mapping Between Landinfra and Citygmlmentioning

confidence: 73%

Harmonising the OGC Standards for the Built Environment: A CityGML Extension for LandInfra

Kumar

Labetski

Ohori

et al. 2019

IJGI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most prominent open standards in the geoinformation domain are: the OGC standard CityGML [37] for storage and exchange of 3D city models, the international IFC standard [25] for BIM models, the OGC standard LandInfra [38] and its GML-based encoding, InfraGML modelling and representing land and infrastructure features. There are several studies that investigate the interoperability between those standards, as well as a recent research by Kumar et al [39] that analyses the differences and similarities between those three standards, with regards to certain criteria as geometry, topology, semantics, encodings, etc. With respect to the legal and administrative information, the most dominant standards are the ISO standard LADM [4] and e-Plan, mostly used in Australia, New Zealand and Singapore.…”

Section: Importance Of Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Land Administration: A Review and a Future Vision in the Context of the Spatial Development Lifecycle

Kalogianni

Oosterom

Dimopoulou

et al. 2020

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land Administration practices worldwide rely mainly on 2D-based systems to define legal and other spatial boundaries related to land interests. However, the built environment is increasingly becoming spatially complex. Land administrators are challenged by an unprecedented demand to utilise space above and below earth's surface. The relationships between people and land in vertical space can no longer be unambiguously represented in 2D. In addition, the current societal demand for sustainability in a collaborative environment and a lifecycle-thinking, is driving the need to integrate independent systems with standalone databases and methodologies, associated with different aspects of the Spatial Development lifeCycle (SDC). Land Administration Systems (LASs) are an important component of the SDC. Today, a LAS is often mandated and managed as a domain in isolation. Interaction and data reuse with the other phases of the SDC is limited and far from optimal. It is expected that effective 3D data collaboration, sharing, and reuse across the sectors and disciplines in the lifecycle will enable new ways of data harmonisation and use in this complex environment; will improve efficiency of design and data acquisition, as well as data quality (in relation to specific regulations); and will minimise inconsistencies and data loss within information flows. Overall, a cross-sectoral approach is directed towards improving the current state of the Land Administration (LA) domain. This paper consists of two parts. In the first, a review of the current situation, with respect to LASs is presented, concluding the needs for improvement in terms of effectiveness and consistency. In the second part, the vision for the future of LASs is introduced in a wider context, and as an important phase in the SDC, with regards to legal, technical, and organisational aspects. In this part, the needs and considerations that result from the evolving environment and the emerging technological advances are addressed, with a view to discussing a cross-sector approach to collect, maintain, reuse, and share 3D data. In such a cross-sectoral approach, various interoperability issues appear, making it necessary to introduce and use standards. In this respect, the ISO 19152:2012 Land Administration Domain Model (LADM) in its current Edition I, as well as in Edition II (expected in 2022) may serve as the standardised core structure of a 3D LAS, with respect to its role as further presented in this paper. In parallel, the evolution of the Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the design and construction industry, as well as the fact that BIM plays a central role in the life cycle of development projects, are well recognized. Emphasis is given on feasible reuse of BIM/IFC (Industry Foundation Class) data in a 3D LAS. Those considerations are addressed through a web-based system architecture for a future 3D LAS, thereby attempting to integrate heterogeneous systems in the SDC.

show abstract

“…Therefore, the integration of BIM and GIS has been considered a promising topic for cross-domain knowledge exchange [8][9][10]. Integration has become especially relevant with the extensive use of BIM for infrastructure, as infrastructure projects extend over large geographic areas and relate more to other features from the natural and built environment than what has typically been handled in BIM [11].…”

Section: Building Information Modelling (Bim) and Geographic Informatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Niestroj et al [36] discussed information models for road asset information exchange and noted that InfraGML might be easier to implement than IFC as GIS applications widely support the GML format. Kavisha et al [11] discussed the LandInfra/InfraGML standards and the IFC Infrastructure extensions and noted that LandInfra/InfraGML could help bridge the gap between BIM and GIS.…”

Section: Integration Of Bim and Gismentioning

confidence: 99%

IFC Schemas in ISO/TC 211 Compliant UML for Improved Interoperability between BIM and GIS

Jetlund

Onstein

Huang

2020

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to improve the interoperability between the application domains of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) by linking and harmonizing core information concepts. Many studies have investigated the integration of application schemas and data instances according to the BIM model IFC and the GIS model CityGML. This study investigates integration between core abstract concepts from IFC and ISO/TC 211 standards for GIS—independent of specific application schemas. A pattern was developed for conversion from IFC EXPRESS schemas to Unified Modelling Language (UML) models according to ISO/TC 211 standards. Core concepts from the two application domains were linked in the UML model, and conversions to implementation schemas for the Geography Markup Language (GML) and EXPRESS were tested. The results showed that the IFC model could be described as an ISO/TC 211 compliant UML model and that abstract concepts from ISO/TC 211 standards could be linked to core IFC concepts. Implementation schemas for BIM and GIS formats could be derived from the UML model, enabling implementation in applications from both domains without conversion of concepts. Future work should include refined linking and harmonization of core abstract concepts from the two application domains.

show abstract

The LandInfra standard and its role in solving the BIM-GIS quagmire

Cited by 41 publications

References 33 publications

Harmonising the OGC Standards for the Built Environment: A CityGML Extension for LandInfra

Harmonising the OGC Standards for the Built Environment: A CityGML Extension for LandInfra

3D Land Administration: A Review and a Future Vision in the Context of the Spatial Development Lifecycle

IFC Schemas in ISO/TC 211 Compliant UML for Improved Interoperability between BIM and GIS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About