ISO/TR 19169:2021

TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 19169
First edition
2021-06
Geographic Information — Gap-
analysis: mapping and describing the
differences between the current GDF
and ISO/TC 211 conceptual models
to suggest ways to harmonize and
resolve conflicting issues
Reference number
©
ISO 2021
© ISO 2021
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting
on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address
below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms . 1
5 Comparing terms and definitions . 2
6 Business considerations . 2
7 Reference model . 3
7.1 General structure . 3
7.1.1 Analysis . 3
7.1.2 Consideration of options . 5
7.1.3 Recommendation and expected impact . 6
7.2 General Conceptual Models . 8
7.2.1 General feature models . 8
7.2.2 Feature models .14
7.2.3 Attribute models .17
7.2.4 Relationship models .23
7.2.5 Album and dataset structure .26
8 Application schemas — GDF Catalogues .27
8.1 The Feature Catalogue .27
8.1.1 Analysis .27
8.1.2 Consideration of options .29
8.1.3 Recommendation and expected impact .29
8.2 The Attribute Catalogue .30
8.2.1 Analysis .30
8.2.2 Consideration of options .33
8.2.3 Recommendation and expected impact .33
8.3 The Relationship Catalogue .33
8.3.1 Analysis .33
8.3.2 Consideration of options .34
8.3.3 Recommendation and expected impact .34
8.4 The Metadata Catalogue .35
8.4.1 Analysis .35
8.4.2 Consideration of options .35
8.4.3 Recommendation and expected impact .36
9 Encoding rules .36
9.1 Analysis.36
9.2 Consideration of options .37
9.3 Recommendation and expected impact .37
10 Other issues arising .38
10.1 Introduction .38
10.2 Temporal referencing .38
10.3 Geodetic location referencing .38
Annex A (informative) Comparison of terms and definitions in ISO/TC 204 and ISO/TC 211 .39
Bibliography .59
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www .iso .org/ directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www .iso .org/ patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www .iso .org/
iso/ foreword .html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 211, Geographic information/Geomatics.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www .iso .org/ members .html.
iv © ISO 2021 – All rights reserved

Introduction
0.1 Background
From the start, GDF (Geographic Data Files) was based on similar geospatial concepts as ISO/TC 211
standards (the ISO 19100 family of standards). Over the years, GDF has been specified to provide
data structures to support a range of transport-related applications and in-car navigation systems.
GDF forms the basis of today's solutions used by TomTom, HERE and other navigational systems. The
ISO 19100 family of standards created by ISO/TC211 remain the conceptual basis for general geospatial
purposes. The basic concepts standards of the ISO 19100 family do not support any specific application
domains but have been widely adopted by the geospatial industry; ISO/TC211 standards also underpin
key European legislation such as the INSPIRE Directive.
With the emergence of increasingly connected and automated road vehicles, there is a need to share
geospatial information between the vehicle’s navigational and contextual awareness systems and the
mapping and road authorities (the road-side actors). The exchange of map-data between these actors
requires extensive interpretations and transformation rules to make sure that the map-data in the on-
board car navigation systems is aligned with that of the road-side actors, and that exchanges of data
robustly support safety and efficiency applications in an unambiguous, coherent way.
GDF continues to be developed to adapt to the requirements of road vehicle automation, as well as wider
domains of application, such as public transport, geospatial and navigation data. A lack of alignment
between GDF key concepts and those of ISO/TC211 standards reduces the collective efficacy of the
combined standards, increases the complexity of utilizing standards-conformant data in an efficient
manner and increases the risk and threats arising from ineffective conversions. This is not efficient,
and is mostly due to the lack of harmonization between the conceptual models of GDF and ISO/TC 211
standards.
Both models are in extensive use: GDF in the vehicle in-car navigation industry and the ISO 19100 family
of standards in the geospatial industry and with public authorities worldwide. Thus, it is not a non-
disruptive option for one group of actors to switch to the other base of standards – nor indeed are these
standards directly functionally equivalent. Therefore, the work underpinning this document aims to
identify the gaps between the two concepts and suggest ways to bridge them.
First, there is a need to perform a gap analysis, and then after that, suggest means to bridge the gap
and finally decide how to create standards or application schemas to accommodate the harmonization
that is necessary. The identification of opportunities to adjust concepts to align GDF and ISO/TC 211
concepts supports the need to achieve
...