February 17, 2006
Did you know that two US presidential Executive Orders
(EOs), considered together, mandate the convergence of building
information and geospatial information in Federal projects? EO 12906
(the 1994 "NSDI" Executive Order signed by President Clinton)
establishes a requirement for geospatial information, including
building footprints. EO 13327 (signed by President Bush in 2004 to
promote efficient and economical use of Federal real property) augments
the previous Executive Order with a requirement for real property
life-cycle information about federal buildings. The value of the
National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) has been recognized
explicitly in the natural resource and environment world - it sprang
from those roots - but there is less awareness of the NSDI in federal
real property management.
In 1994, the year of EO 12906 and the founding of the OGC, the cost of
geospatial data non-interoperability in the US - redundant data
collection, costly data conversion, inability to share data developed
with different data models, etc. - was reported to be about $14
billion/year. Today, the cost of non-interoperability in the U.S.
capital facilities industry alone is about the same, $14 billion/year,
according
to a recent
study (PDF) prepared for the National Institute of Standards
(NIST) by RTI International and the Logistic Management Institute. $14
billion is about 5% of the US construction industry market.
The "non-interoperability waste factor" in the
Architecture/Engineering/Construction (AEC) and real estate worlds has
causes similar to the causes of the non-interoperability waste factor
in the geospatial world. A multitude of professional roles, including
engineer, architect, consultant, contractor/builder, supplier, project
manager, permitting agency, building manager, maintenance contractor,
owner, planner, developer, banker, broker, insurance agent, attorney
and CPA, require information about a building, much of it information
that others have quite likely already collected. At every stage in the
life cycle of a building, data are collected. Much of these data will
still be valuable in subsequent stages of development.
Typically - and unfortunately - professionals involved with the
building process develop and use their portion of the data only for a
brief period; and then those data are not shared with others in the
building process; and finally, even worse, they are lost. This is
partly because they use different types and brands of software that
don't communicate, partly because they use different data models, and
partly because appropriate data sharing and archiving policies are not
in place. Ideally, as with geospatial data, building data should be
collected once and used many times, instead of being collected many
times to be used only once. And, to enable easy and automated exchange
of data and processing instructions, the systems should employ open
interfaces and encodings that hide the systems' internal differences.
CAD/geospatial convergence is necessary because the professionals in
the AEC and real estate worlds often need to use building information
in the context of map layers such as the cadastre, communications,
demographics, environmental hazards, land use and zoning, land cover,
soil, transportation, utilities, hydrography and elevation.
Seamless integration of building data and geospatial data helps owners,
buyers and mortgage institutions define the value of the building. It
helps with design visualization and coordination, owner/tenant
communication, construction sequencing, energy simulation,
traffic/egress simulation, facility management and other activities.
Homeland Security, too, requires the ability to share data across
organizations, at all levels.
Increasingly, such tasks are being analyzed as workflows, the flow of
activities and interactions in a project. Much of this "flow" is
information flow. The purpose of such analysis is to engineer more
efficient workflows that take full advantage of information technology.
Where workflows involve the cooperation of multiple participants in
independent organizations working on multiple tasks, the only
reasonable approach is to use an open architecture and an interoperable
software environment. Through an array of open, consensus-derived
Information Technology standards, one step can flow smoothly into the
next and all project components and documents can be integrated to help
people successfully accomplish their piece of a project.
Significant progress toward this goal has been made. It was not true in
1994, but it is often true today that the seamless flow of information
can include, to some degree, engineering and GIS data, image
processing, desktop mapping, location services, photogrammetry and
laser scans.
The OGC's CAD-GIS Interoperability Working Group is one important arena
in which progress toward this goal continues. At the 55th OGC Technical
Committee meeting in Bonn, Germany in November, Mark Reichardt of the
OGC gave a report on International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI)
collaboration to achieve Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) revisions
and on the National Building Information Model (BIM) Standard in U.S.,
activities in which the OGC is involved. Thomas Kolbe at the University
of Bonn provided a CityGML update, and Carsten Roensdorf spoke about 3D
and GML at the Ordnance Survey in Great Britain. Paul Scarponcini of
Bentley Systems provided an update on TransXML, a US national effort to
develop broadly accepted public domain XML and GML schemas for exchange
of transportation data. Řivind Rooth of the National Office of
Building Technology and Administration, Oslo, described the IFC/IFG
Norway Use Case Articulation. Josh Lieberman of Traverse Technologies
and Udo Quadt of the University of Bonn reported on CAD-GIS
coordination with the OGC Web Terrain Service (WTS) and W3DS.
At the meeting, George Percivall of the OGC spoke about the potential
for doing work in this area in OWS-4, OGC's next major Interoperability
Initiative. OWS-4 is still in the planning stage, but it is expected to
kick off this spring. If you have interest in helping to
determine the technical scope of OWS-4, whether your goals involve CAD
or not, email
George Percivall. OGC's Interoperability Initiatives provide an
unmatched opportunity to achieve immediate, practical, interoperability
in your microcosm, which can result, through a shared and open effort,
in a standard that benefits the whole world. It doesn't require an
Executive order of the President of the United States.
|
Your Comments Post a comment All comments provided in this section are those of the individual who has created the post. These are not the opinions of Directions Media, its editors, staff or owners unless otherwise noted. Directions Media retains the right to edit or delete any comments posted herein.
|
|
||||||
| True, EO 13327 calls for an inventory of Federal properties, but it has two shortcomings. First, it exempts "public lands", which represents more than 260 million acres and more than 2/3 of what the Federal Government owns. Additionally, the inventory being developed by GSA, pursuant to EO 13327, does not have a geospatial component. All members of the geospatial community should write their Congressmen and Senators and urge support for H.R. 1370, the Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform (FLAIR) Act, introduced by Rep. Chris Cannon of Utah. This bill would implement a Federal land cadastre, in accordance with the standards suggested by the National Academy of Sciences in its 1980 report, "Need for a Multipurpose Cadastre". The FLAIR Act was developed in consultation with MAPPS and others. |
||||||

