FGDC Address Standard Update: What's Next? Address Standard Working Group Martha Wells, GISP Carl Anderson, GISP Sara Yurman, GISP Ed Wells, GISP Hilary.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
From the eyes of an Administrator A general overview of e-CFunds Administrative Site, including navigation and exploring the features of this powerful.
Advertisements

Status on the Mapping of Metadata Standards
The FGDC Address Standard & Readings Address Database Model A work in progress…
FGDC & ISO: What is the Current Status and Considerations when Moving Forward? Viv Hutchison USGS Core Science Systems November 10, 2010 Salem, OR.
Update on Oregon’s Address Point Repository Project Bob DenOuden, GIS Framework Coordinator Dept. of Administrative Services Office of the State CIO Geospatial.
Applying the NSDI Framework Transportation Standard for Data Exchange Facts and Fallacies.
The Address Data Content Standard: A Presentation to the FGDC Coordination Group, April 1, 2003 By: Anne O’Connor, Matthew McCready And April Avnayim.
The United States Thoroughfare, Landmark and Postal Address Data Standard Submitted for Review to: FGDC Standards Working Group By URISA International.
Geographic Support System Initiative (GSS-I) Partnership Program Update for the State Data Center Leads September 19, 2012.
United Nations Statistics Division Principles and concepts of classifications.
NENA Development Conference | October 2014 | Orlando, Florida GIS Data Model for NG9-1-1 Marc Berryman, ENP Richard Kelly Michelle Manuel Raymond Horner.
Civic Location Data eXchange Format (CLDXF) Michael Gurley GIS Coordinator Oregon Office of Emergency Management.
Geospatial standards Beyond FGDC Geog 458: Map Sources and Errors March 3, 2006.
Alabama Dept. Finance Information Services Division Geospatial Office Address Advocacy The building pressure on address data to benefit the community and.
Lecture 5 Geocoding. What is geocoding? the process of transforming a description of a location—such as a pair of coordinates, an address, or a name of.
1 Overview of Fulton County GIS Address Model Carl Anderson Fulton County GIS.
Business Customer Gateway 1 PCC Mailer’s Education Seminar Reno Nevada May 20, 2010 Business Customer Gateway Michael Hemphill CSG Direct, Inc.
XP New Perspectives on Microsoft Access 2002 Tutorial 71 Microsoft Access 2002 Tutorial 7 – Integrating Access With the Web and With Other Programs.
The United States Thoroughfare, Landmark and Postal Address Data Standard Presentation to: FGDC Coordination Group By URISA International March 16, 2010.
Esri UC2013. Technical Workshop. Technical Workshop 2013 Esri International User Conference July 8–12, 2013 | San Diego, California ArcGIS for Local Government.
Overview of Draft Street Address Standard
Update on INSPIRE: INSPIRE maintenance and implementation and INSPIRE related EEA activities on biodiversity CDDA/European protected areas technical meeting.
FS Enterprise Data Warehouse and Standard Reference Data.
S New Security Developments in DICOM Lawrence Tarbox, Ph.D Chair, DICOM WG 14 (Security) Siemens Corporate Research.
Metadata Understanding the Value and Importance of Proper Data Documentation Exercise 2 Reading a Metadata File Exercise 3 Using the Workbook Exercise.
GJXDM User’s Conference September 7, 2006 Component Reuse: Identifying and Building Components for Use in Exchange Analysis.
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 1 BEA Address Construct and Supporting Leading Practices/Standards April 1, 2010 Craig Adams, ODUSD(I&E) BEI.
Metadata, the CARARE Aggregation service and 3D ICONS Kate Fernie, MDR Partners, UK.
North American Profile: Partnership across borders. Sharon Shin, Metadata Coordinator, Federal Geographic Data Committee Raphael Sussman; Manager, Lands.
Copyright © 2012, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 1 Quick Tutorial – Part 2 Open Data Web Services for Oracle BPM August, 2013 Forms.
Handshake across the border… The North American Profile Sharon Shin Federal Geographic Data Committee.
Address Maps and Apps for State and Local Governments
1 Integrated Services Program The Virginia Metadata Training Workshop Summer, 2006 Lyle Hornbaker Integrated Services Program
1 What’s Next for Financial Management Line of Business (FMLoB)? AGA/GWSCPA 6 th Annual Conference Dianne Copeland, Director, FSIO May 8, 2007.
JIEM and Business Process Change. Exchange Analysis  Work with stakeholder Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to identify information sharing requirements.
Address Levels Business Use Alignment. Introduction Objective is to provide layers of address granularity tailored to business use Address use levels.
FEBRUARY 5, 2014 DOWNTOWN ATHLETIC CLUB EUGENE, OREGON Welcome to the Oregon GIS Framework Forum.
2008 EPA and Partners Metadata Training Program: 2008 CAP Project Geospatial Metadata: Introduction Module 4: ISO 19115/19139 Metadata.
S&I Integration with NIEM (DRAFT) Standards Development Support June 8, 2011.
Transitioning from FGDC CSDGM Metadata to ISO 191** Metadata
SDC JE What is a Data Registry? v A place to keep facts about characteristics of data that are necessary to clearly describe, inventory,
NG9-1-1 Core Architecture: i3 v3 TERRY REESE BRIAN ROSEN.
Geography Markup Language (GML). What is GML? – Scope  The Geography Markup Language is  a modeling language for geographic information  an encoding.
JIEM and Business Process Change. 2 Objectives Need for Exchange Analysis – Available Tools What is JIEM? Business Process Modeling Using JIEM Where JIEM.
Geography Markup Language (GML). GML What is GML? – Scope  The Geography Markup Language is  a modeling language for geographic information  an encoding.
ESRI Education User Conference – July 6-8, 2001 ESRI Education User Conference – July 6-8, 2001 Introducing ArcCatalog: Tools for Metadata and Data Management.
U.S. Census Data & TIGER/Line Files
A look to the past for the future- The North American Profile Sharon Shin Metadata Coordinator Federal Geographic Data Committee.
INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ESTATÍSTICA Census 2011 Mapping Portuguese Process United Nations EGM on Contemporary Practices in Census Mapping and Use of GIS.
Public Libraries Survey Data File Overview. 2 What We’ll Talk About PLS: Public Library Survey State level data Public library data (Administrative Entities)
June, 2005 NCSC Component Library National Center for State Courts & URL Integration June, 2005
Data Quality in INSPIRE Carol Agius Q-KEN, 5 – 7 May 2010, Brussels.
Airdrie Land Use Bylaw Presentation to City Council May 2, 2016.
SharePoint University of the Highlands and Islands SharePoint for Records Management.
Esri UC 2014 | Technical Workshop | Address Maps and Apps for State and Local Government Allison Muise Nikki Golding Scott Oppmann.
GIS Project1 Physical Structure of GDB Geodatabase Feature datasets Object classes, subtypes Features classes, subtypes Relationship classes Geometric.
FGDC Address Data Standard Scope, Status, and Structure  United States Street, Landmark, and Postal Address Data Standard"  Scope: Street, landmark,
Geospatial metadata Prof. Wenwen Li School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning 5644 Coor Hall
Overview of Draft U.S. Address Data Standard Martha McCart Wells, GISPSpatial Focus, Inc. Ed Wells, GISPWMATA Carl Anderson, GISPFulton County, GA Sara.
Overview of the FGDC U.S. Address Data Standard Martha McCart Wells, GISPSpatial Focus, Inc. Ed Wells, GISPWMATA Carl Anderson, GISPSpatial Focus, Inc.
1 Overview of Draft Street Address Standard Co-Chairs: Martha LombardEd WellsHilary Perkins Spatial Focus, Inc.DC OCTOJacobs Civil, Inc. Address Data Standards.
Developing a Comprehensive Address Data Standard for the United States U.S. Address Standard Working Group: Martha McCart Wells, GISP, Spatial Focus Inc.
Technical Standards: Paving the Way to NG9-1-1
Implementing the Surface Transportation Domain
JDXpert Workday Integration
GTECH 709 Geocoding and address matching
NORTH CAROLINA state and local government METADATA PROFILE
2. An overview of SDMX (What is SDMX? Part I)
Proposal of a Geographic Metadata Profile for WISE
Kimberly Sparks, GISP and Evan O’Keefe
Presentation transcript:

FGDC Address Standard Update: What's Next? Address Standard Working Group Martha Wells, GISP Carl Anderson, GISP Sara Yurman, GISP Ed Wells, GISP Hilary Perkins, GISP

FGDC Address Data Standard Scope, Status, and Structure – United States Street, Landmark, and Postal Address Data Standard" – Scope: Street, landmark, and postal addresses in the United States – Status: FGDC-endorsed standard – Structure: One data standard in four parts: Data Content Data Classification Data Quality Data Exchange

Purpose of the Standard Provide a systematic basis for recording all addresses in the United States Provide one standard that meets the address data management needs of: – Local address administrators – Emergency response and navigation – Postal and package delivery – Administrative recordkeeping – Address data aggregation Support best practices in address data management

Organization of the FGDC Standard Data Content Data Classification Data Quality Data Exchange Two profiles: USPS and NENA (still in draft)

Number, Subaddress and Street Name Elements Address Number Elements – Address Number Prefix – Address Number – Address Number Suffix – Complete Address Number Subaddress Elements – Subaddress Type – Subaddress ID – Subaddress – Complete Subaddress Street Name Elements – Street Name Premodifier – Street Name Predirectional – Street Name Pre-type – Separator Element – Street Name – Street Name Post-type – Street Name Postdirectional – Street Name Postmodifier – Complete Street Name

Landmark, Place Name and Postal Elements Landmark Elements – Landmark Name – Complete Landmark Name Place Names – Place Name (community, municipal, postal, county) – Place Name Type – State Name – Country Name – ZIP Code – ZIP + 4 Postal Elements – USPS Box Type – USPS Box ID – USPS Box – USPS Box Group Type – USPS Box Group ID – USPS Route – USPS Address – USPS General Delivery Point

Address Attributes Address Identifiers (UUID) Address Geometry Address Status Attributes for Quality Control Attributes that relate addresses to other features (parcels, roads, etc.) and to each other

Address Reference System Elements Provide for description of the rules used in assigning addresses and street names Useful in documenting addressing practices Essential for quality control – If you don’t know the rules, you can’t determine what is right and what is wrong. Example: if you have an even number in an address, how do you know whether it’s on the correct side of the street. The Address Reference System will identify which side should be even numbers, and a quality control test can be run to see whether the even number in an address is on the side which should have even numbers

NENA NG9-1-1 CLDXF Standard Civic Location Data Exchange Format – Developed by the NENA Next Generation Data Development Working Group

What Is CLDXF? Standardized way to exchange call civic location (address) information – Created by NENA NGDD WG as part of Next Generation suite of standards – Status: Not yet adopted. Public review complete. Comments under adjudication. Profile of IETF Geo-priv PIDF-LO Related by profile to the new FGDC address data standard – A profile restricts or extends a base standard (without contradicting it) for a particular application.

CLDXF Contents Elements needed to compose addresses in call records: – Country, state, and place names and codes – Street name elements – Address number elements – Landmark name – Subaddress elements

What CLDXF Excludes Addresses that are unacceptable in call records: – Intersection addresses – Address ranges – PO Boxes, Rural Routes and similar postal addresses Information not needed in the address portion of a call record: – Address IDs and attributes – Address classes – Address quality tests

Key CLDXF-FGDC Differences Reasons for differences – CLDXF is about call records, not address records Addresses are a vital element of call records – Different purposes and use cases – CLDXF must conform to PIDF-LO framework

Creating the CLDXF – FGDC Profile Compared the business purposes of the standards – Determined which address classes and elements were needed for NENA purposes – Mapped FGDC elements and NENA elements to each other – Compared the element definitions, examples, notes, etc. in complete detail. Noted all discrepancies. Reviewed FGDC address classes and determined which were useful in CLDXF. – Within the profile, restricted or extended the FGDC standard as needed to accommodate discrepancies and exclusions. Listed the steps needed to convert between NENA and FGDC address records.

What's in the Profile? Detailed, element by element comparison of FGDC and NENA elements – Which NENA element corresponds to which FGDC elements Discrepancies, comparisons, reconciliation Other restrictions and extensions: parts, classes, domains of values Step-by-step task list for converting address records between NENA and FGDC standards. Conformance requirements

Result Address data exchange will be included in the NG9-1-1 suite of standards CLDXF will be a NENA standard and statement of best practice for voluntary adoption by PSAPs nationwide. CLDXF conforms to the IETF PIDF-LO but makes it US-specific. CLDXF and FGDC standards are tightly related. Address data managers can exchange data across the standards. The three standards reinforce each other.

Implementation: CAP Grants and Beyond Implementation: CAP Grants and Beyond Moving Forward

Federal, State and Local Adoption and Use Census and other federal agencies are using the Standard Several states, counties and cities have adopted the standard, and are implementing data models that use it ASWG is planning to work with NIEM to develop a profile for their use Planning to propose Addresses as the eighth data theme in the NSDI Framework

Benefits of the Standard Provides a comprehensive syntactical (grammatical) approach to address data across the United States Incorporates Quality Control (no other standard does this) Provides for standardized exchange of information

CAP Grants Support Implementation Two CAP Grants from FGDC for Address Standard Implementation – One provides for development of tools Creation of a hyperlinked, web implementation of the standard so that the standard is more accessible and comprehensible to users Creation of tools for preparing data for import and export – One provides for the development of training materials to assist local governments in implementing the standard

Quality Control for Address Data Using fishbones to verify addresses—standard provides the tools so that the quality of address data can be tracked.

Data Exchange Standard contains a full.XSD (XML definition document) for address data, attributes, and quality measures. XML also provides a structure for address data (a data model, but not a database model) Links to tools being developed to prepare data for import and export

Questions and Discussion

For Further Information Contact: Martha McCart Wells, GISP – Spatial Focus, Inc. – – The Standard may be downloaded from URISA – – PDF files available at this time. – The.XSD diagrams are also hyperlinked to this site