Henning
On Mar 24, 2010, at 4:30 PM, creed@opengeospatial.org wrote:
> Anyone in the group familiar with Omniclass? The OmniClass Construction
> Classification System (known as OmniClass™ or OCCS) is a classification
> system for the construction industry. Omniclass has been defined and is
> used by hundreds of AEC software, design, and construction organizations.
> Perhaps there may be something useful?
>
> Omniclass and BIM are related - the IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) use
> Omniclass in the Properties Table.
>
> So, if anyone is looking for a taxonomy of building elements, this may be
> the place to look.
>
> Carl
>
>
>> To continue the discussion in the meeting:
>>
>> One of the assumptions is that things are commonly labeled, but that's
>> rather rare in practice. Naming is typically implicit and by context,
>> i.e., your hotel room doesn't have a label "Room 742", but rather just a
>> carved label with the digits 7-4-2 on it. The same is generally true for
>> airport gates, airport terminals and a whole bunch of other sub-building
>> labels. Naturally, the building model may have some set of labels, but
>> they are not visible to visitors and other consumers of location
>> information.
>>
>> Thus, if you want to support I18N, you want to have as many
>> generally-understood labels, so that my German indoor location client can
>> render "(Room) 742" as "Zimmer 742". More dramatically, in a Chinese
>> hotel, that rendering is much more meaningful to the non-Chinese visitor
>> than the Chinese symbol for room, which is likely nowhere to be seen on a
>> wall or door sign. The Chinese LIS likely won't know German, even if it
>> could do some translation (which is unlikely, given the multiple delivery
>> steps between the source of location and the final consumer).
>>
>> It is clear that there are less-common sub-building units where we simply
>> can't define CA types or XML tags for all of them. For those, I have no
>> objection to use the IN tag. However, for the very common ones (the
>> current ones), the current explicit labels provide a much better user
>> experience as long as they indeed map to their real meaning. In other
>> words, it's a bad idea to label an airport "gate" as a "room".
>>
>> Thus, the combination of using FLR etc. for the 80% of common buildings
>> (office, hotels, residences), while dealing with the special cases with IN
>> labels seems to give the best compromise between semantic tagging and
>> flexibility to deal with the other 20%.
>>
>> Otherwise, you'll have to define a registry of well-known IN XML
>> attributes. In that model, the Chinese hotel would have to use the English
>> literal "Room" for the IN label, even though it uses Chinese-language
>> labels for all the other attributes.
>>
>> Henning
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geopriv mailing list
>> Geopriv@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
