hugoledoux
commented
6 years ago @tudelft3d would participate and support this with our experience. Not as sponsor though.
Open volkercoors opened 6 years ago
hugoledoux
commented
6 years ago @tudelft3d would participate and support this with our experience. Not as sponsor though.
Proposal based on the email discussion on CityGML 3.0: Currently CItyGML has many different valid ways to model the same thing. That is very flexible, but on the other hand very difficult to implement in software. At least in our development of SimStadt we basically gave up to support all possible variants of how to model a building and support only a profile. If the CityGML file does not match the profile, some additional work needs to be done. This is ok in a world of data delivery services that are processed with "human in the loop". Anyhow, I'd like to work more on Micro Web Service pipelines to offer "simulation as a service", including WFS 3.0 to support CityGML or CityJSON and to know what I really get from the service to be able to further process it by other (tiny) service. Currently, I have to put a "validation" service in between to see if the (valid) CityGML model is as needed by the following process (Solid geometry available etc.).
It would be great to have this information in a modular schema, for example something like this: my service supports "CityGML 3.0 core modul + solid extension/profile". This can be done either by a complex core that covers everything, and define profiles to restrict it. Or by a tiny core and extensions to support specific use cases. Both approaches have pros and cons.
After being involved in Testbed 13 and 14, I think Testbeds are a good way to explore such questions in more detail. So why not try to do it in Testbed 15. Any sponsors for this one? Whould be really useful, especially to see the pros and cons of the different approaches and its impact on useing citygml in a pipeline of micro webservices. We need that for the Urban data platform in Smart Cities.