Enabling global exchange of groundwater data: GroundWaterML2 (GWML2)

Brodaric, Boyan; Boisvert, Eric; Chery, Laurence; Dahlhaus, Peter; Grellet, Sylvain; Kmoch, Alexander; Létourneau, F; Lucido, Jessica M.; Simons, Bruce; Wagner, Bernhard

doi:10.1007/s10040-018-1747-9

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The key aspects of a water feature are not all distinguished by any one approach, and the complete range of representative water features is not delineated. This also holds true for emerging international standards for hydro data (Boisvert and Brodaric, 2012;Brodaric et al, 2018;INSPIRE Thematic Working Group Geology, 2013;INSPIRE Thematic Working Group Hydrography, 2014;Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), 2018;Strassberg et al, 2011;Maidment and Morehouse, 2002).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Both cases can be found in water ontologies, as water feature descriptions vary widely and the entities measured by predominant types of water sensors are not fully discriminated. Examples of this can be found when comparing international water data standards (Boisvert and Brodaric, 2012;Brodaric et al, 2018;Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), 2018;INSPIRE Thematic Working Group Geology, 2013;INSPIRE Thematic Working Group Hydrography, 2014), national catalogs of hydrographic features (Duce and Krzysztof, 2010), ontological considerations (Galton and Mizoguchi, 2009;Santos et al, 2005;Sinha et al, 2014;Wellen and Sieber, 2013), and hydro database structures (Maidment and Morehouse, 2002;Strassberg et al, 2011). At the heart of the problem is a disparity about the fundamental nature of a water feature, as different aspects are variously present and diversely represented in distinct ontologies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Water features and their parts

Brodaric

Hahmann

Grüninger

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water features such as rivers, clouds, and aquifers are primarily understood from sensor measurements. Ontologies for the hydro domain play a key role in describing sensor measurements, particularly to aid water data interoperability, but water features are under-represented in such ontologies. In this paper we build upon existing work in hydro ontologies to enhance the characterization and representation of water features. An enhanced theory of physical object parthood is developed that enables water features to be characterized as wholes with various essential parts, building on Fine's theory of parts and Hayes' ontology of liquids. The results are represented as a formal extension of the DOLCE ontology, and advance the HyFO reference ontology for the hydro domain. . B. Brodaric et al. / Water featuresheight remains despite the departure of specific water matter amounts. The key aspects of a river that are thus differentiated by Fine include its water object, container, amounts of water matter and their flow. However, a river is not identified with any of these key aspects and the exact nature of the relationship between a river and each aspect is not explicitly addressed, as river ontology is not the focus of the work.Applied ontology. The ontology of fluids (Hayes, 1985) recognizes two more key aspects: (1) the void hosted by a container, such as the space in a river channel, and (2) the supporting entity holding up the water, such as a riverbed. Water features are then variously identified with a key aspect, initially with the void and then with the water object. In both cases the identification is problematic, as it implies, for example, contrary persistence conditions in the case of the void, because a river would then exist whenever its channel space exists, and it precludes the existence of dry rivers in the water object case. Whole-part relations are also not used to connect a water feature to its key aspects, such as a river to its container or void, though relations for the support, containment, connectivity, and movement of water matter appear fundamental.The emphasis on water movement is elevated in a process-oriented approach, in which the processes enacted by an object are essential to its identity and existence, with notable examples including waterfalls and rivers Mizoguchi, 2009). However, voids (Casati andVarzi, 1994;Hahmann and Brodaric, 2012) do not play a significant role in the makeup of a water feature in this approach, water features are not clearly differentiated from water objects, and tying water feature identity to enacted processes results in water features that do not exist when the processes stop or pause, e.g. if the water stops running then the hydraulic erosion of the river channel also stops, thus the river does not exist in dry periods.The potential to differentiate water features from water objects is evident in related work on quantities, such as fluids (Guizzardi, 2010), where a wine vintage is delineated from its wine matter amounts and containers. However, a vintage is ...

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water features and their parts

Brodaric

Hahmann

Grüninger

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These data can range from semantically simple to requiring very complex and codified data structure in order to become interoperable between applications and systems (e.g. Brodaric et al 2018). Taken together these diverse datasets represent thick data difficult to analyse through automated systems.…”

Section: Predictive Geoscience and Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geological Survey of Canada 8.0: mapping the journey towards predictive geoscience

Lebel¹

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) has been furthering the geoscientific understanding of Canada since its inception in 1842, the equivalent of seven generations ago. The evolution of the activities of the GSC over this period has been driven by evolving geographic, economic and political contexts and needs. Likewise, new technologies and evolving scientific methods and models shaped broadly the successive generations of GSC geoscience activities. The most recent GSC generation presented a mixed portfolio of large framework mapping geoscience programmes, and more targeted, hypothesis-driven geoscience research, and the development of decision support products for a range of government, industry and other stakeholders needs. Entering its eighth generation, the GSC and related organizations are embracing digital technologies for applications such as the evaluation of mineral resource potential, the evaluation of risks and the early warning of earthquakes. In order to do so, the GSC will need to develop new methods and systems in cooperation with other geological survey organizations, and target its data acquisition and research to further advance its ability to respond to the evolving needs of society to navigate geology through space and time, from the past to the present, and from the present to the future.

show abstract

“…Usability is demonstrated by satisfaction of the five usage scenarios, including the delivery of all data required by the scenarios via the web services and the GWML2 physical schema. Further details about subsequent manipulation of the data to meet the usage scenarios is detailed in [5]. This successful evaluation of GWML2 also implies successful evaluation of its design method, including the addition of a conceptual schema, insofar as application of the method led to appropriate results.…”

Section: Gwml2 Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GWML2 is developed by the OGC's Groundwater Standard Working Group operating under the Hydro Domain Working Group. As this paper focusses on method development for geospatial data standards design, the GWML2 standard is described only minimally (for a full description see [4,5]), and standards for data access, e.g. for web services, are out of scope.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The conceptual schema in geospatial data standard design with application to GroundWaterML2

Brodaric

Boisvert

Dahlhaus

et al. 2018

Open geospatial data, softw. stand.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The explosive growth of geospatial data has stimulated the development of many standards aimed at decreasing data heterogeneity and enhancing data use. Well-established design methods for geospatial data standards typically involve the creation of two schemas for data structure, designated here as logical and physical, but this can lead to conceptual inconsistencies and modelling inefficiencies. In this paper we describe a design method that overcomes these issues by incorporating an additional schemathe conceptual schemaand demonstrate its application to the design of GroundWaterML2 (GWML2), a new international standard for groundwater data. Results include not only a new data standard, robustly constructed and tested, but also an enhanced method for geospatial data standard design.

show abstract

Enabling global exchange of groundwater data: GroundWaterML2 (GWML2)

Cited by 15 publications

References 29 publications

Water features and their parts

Water features and their parts

Geological Survey of Canada 8.0: mapping the journey towards predictive geoscience

The conceptual schema in geospatial data standard design with application to GroundWaterML2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About