Primary navigation

Minnesota Governor’s Council on Geographic Information

GIS STANDARDS COMMITTEE

MEETING NOTES

May 11, 1999

Attendees

(Meeting handouts available on request. Call (651) 296-1208 or email: gc@mnplan.state.mn.us)
 

Action Items for Next Meeting
  • The strategic planning work group will draft a response to each of the 4 priority clusters identified at the retreat as well as a draft workplan for the next two years. Both drafts will be circulated for Committee review.
  • Maki will circulate the draft white paper on developing a statewide Minnesota GIS infrastructure.
  • Kotz, Kritzky, Maki and Mayer will continue to assess how the coding standards working group could proceed.
  • The Keyword Thesaurus Working Group will continue to draft thesaurus materials.
  • The Positional Accuracy Working Group will continue to work with the MN Planning publishing team to edit the positional accuracy handbook.

Introductions, Approval of Agenda and Last Meeting Minutes

Minutes from 3/23/99 were approved with the following change on page 3: Cialek suggested that the second paragraph under "1. Attribute Coding Standards" belongs under "4. Explore existing standards and identify most important". The agenda was approved, except that the "Carryover from last meeting: Involvement in Important Standards Development Work" item was deferred again.

Updates

Theme Keywords: Cialek distributed the current draft of the thesaurus [Handout: Geographic Thesaurus Terms: Land, GIS, Soils, Water combined] in order to illustrate its structure and the types of terms that can be included. The content still needs extensive revision; the water-related theme terms are the most complete. The working group is debating the scope of terms to include, whether to focus only on theme keywords or to include broader terms such as "GIS" and "cartography." If not included under "Theme Keyword," broader terms might be included under a potential "Resource Type" element in the metadata guidelines. Once the theme content becomes stabilized within the GIS community, the next task will be to develop a tool or interface to allow users to implement it. Kotz raised an important question about whether keywords will be singular or plural (answer unknown at this point) and pointed out that a thesaurus will always be evolving as it is used. The working group is also drafting a document to explain the purpose and structure of a thesaurus. The materials will be presented at the Governor's Council June 14 meeting to initiate a wider review process. Comments are welcome and may be directed to Cialek or Eileen Quam.

Positional Accuracy: The Committee's draft handbook on the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy was cited in the Spring 1999 issue of the FGDC Newsletter (see last article at: http://fgdc.er.usgs.gov/publications/documents/geninfo/fgdcnl0399.html ) which has increased requests for the document. Minnesota Planning is editing the report, although the demands of the legislative session have slowed the project. Mayer said that she is working with Mn/DOT to use the handbook to assess the positional accuracy of the 1997 Twin Cities metro DOQs.

Transportation Working Group: Cialek reported that little progress has been made so far on creating a transportation working group (no Mn/DOT members could attend this Committee meeting due to a scheduling conflict). He had met with Mary Welfling from Mn/DOT's Office of Information Policy to discuss the idea of the working group. She explained that although many people at Mn/DOT understand the need for standards, it has been difficult to free up resources needed to develop, test and promote standards, even those needed for internal use. Committee discussion noted that although everyone looks to Mn/DOT for transportation information and leadership, so far the department has focused primarily on internal needs. Mn/DOT's partnerships with local government may open a natural alliance at the county level. Sufficient commitment from Mn/DOT is essential for establishing a viable working group.

Metadata Training Materials Development Session: Rader will attend this FGDC-sponsored session on June 3-5 near Reston, Virginia. The FGDC has contracted with the University Consortium for Geographic Information Systems (UCGIS) to develop a consistent set of metadata training materials which will be aimed at a university audience but will also be made freely available to others. Meeting participants will assess which existing metadata training materials have worked and how to improve those that have not worked. For further explanation of the FGDC's philosophy on metadata education, Rader referenced Rick Pearsall's presentation on "Train the Trainer" at: http://www.fgdc.gov/publications/documents/ppt/powerpoint.html .

Attribute coding standards

Kotz reported that this working group has not yet developed a work plan, but that they will likely choose the FIPS-55 place code as the next standard to examine. As reported at previous meetings, the FIPS-55 minor civil division (MCD) code for the seven county Twin Cities metropolitan area has already been adopted as an exchange standard by MetroGIS. The group would assess whether the MCD code would work at a statewide level and whether other FIPS-55 place names could also be used. The Committee was unsure whether any Minnesota organization currently maintains a master list of the place name codes, if such a standard were adopted, a custodian would have to be identified to deal with data maintenance issues. As added impetus to investigate FIPS-55, the codes will be used in the 2000 Census.

Standardize file structures and important conversion routines
Maki distributed a draft white paper describing a "Minnesota enterprise" concept [Handout: Toward Developing a Statewide Minnesota Geographic Information System Infrastructure, 5/11/99 draft]. The paper is intended to further the discussion of a broader context in which to place the Committee's work. This context can help the Committee determine whether projects are within its scope, establish priorities and set goals to achieve tangible results.

Maki explained that the term "enterprise" does not mean all participants need to be tightly integrated. Rather, it is envisioned as a way to use the Internet as a vehicle to facilitate communication and distribute "products" between groups. The Internet currently provides physical connections using minimal standards and is largely an unstructured mass of webpages with links; the addition of some structure to part of it could vastly improve its usefulness. The enterprise concept need not be limited to state or other government organizations, and data would not have to be provided for free (although much of it would likely be free). The advantage to distributors is that they would not have to develop their own discovery and delivery applications; instead, they could focus on documentating and organizing the data and then take advantage of the existing enterprise structure.

Maki cited two existing models of what can become possible when participants agree on basic standards:
1. The Minnesota Geographic Data Clearinghouse (part of the FGDC Clearinghouse): the clearinghouse facilitates data discovery, understanding and basic access; it has been standardized enough that it is relatively easy to add additional organizations, and participation is free. See the first link on: http://www.lmic.state.mn.us/chouse/index.html .

2. DNR's new Data Deli application: the Deli enhances data understanding and delivery using public domain, vendor-independent software. The Deli requires a minimum set of specifications for data file naming and organization; it could be expanded to support data from other groups, as long as the data conform to the specifications. See http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us .

Note: the above applications are more structured than the DNR-based Foundations project. Foundations is intended to provide a mechanism to discover a variety of websites that contain environmental information; it is not designed as a delivery mechanism.
See http://www.bridges.state.mn.us/ .

The enterprise could be envisioned as a "Minnesota Resources" page that people could use as a clearinghouse for data exchange, consulting services, software resources, etc. People would know that information from this page would adhere to certain standards (e.g., DNR's Data Deli always delivers files in UTM Zone 15, NAD83) and would contain documentation. Knowing these standards would not only let people know what they were getting, but streamline any conversions that would be needed to make the data useful in their systems. For example, if all data was in UTM, anyone who needed it in county coordinates could work out the transformation once and then repeat the procedure for all other enterprise data. Cialek noted that as delivery becomes easier and as more people obtain data without talking with a staff person, documenting the quality of data becomes even more important.

Maki emphasized that this enterprise idea cannot be handled solely by either the working group or the Standards Committee. It will need discussion, adoption and promotion at a higher level, whether by the Governor's Council, the Office of Technology, or some other organization(s). Committee members are encouraged to review the white paper and bring their comments to the next meeting or send them to Maki. The paper is a draft and all of it is open for discussion and modification.

Note meeting date change!!! The next meeting of the GIS Standards Committee is Thursday, June 10th, 1999, 9:30 - 11:30, Room 301, Centennial Office Building, St. Paul, MN.

Minutes submitted by N. Rader

back to top