[gpl_list] GPL Review of the Draft LiDAR Standard

[MCCLELLAN Philip L]

 Is it possible to set up a conference for people who are unable to attend the GPL meeting in the future?

Phil 


***************CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE***************

This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this email in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.

  _____  

Phil McClellan
ORMAP Project Coordinator
Property Tax Division - CDOT
503-586-8128


 


-----Original Message-----
From: gpl_list-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us [mailto:gpl_list-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of Brady Callahan
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 9:18 AM
To: gpl_list at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
Subject: [gpl_list] GPL Review of the Draft LiDAR Standard

I won't be able to make the GPL meeting today but had a couple comments on the draft LiDAR standard that I wanted to share with the group:

-There are existing FIT standards for both elevation point data (Oregon Elevation Data Standard) and geodetic point data (Geodetic Control Data Content Standard) so what is the necessity of a third standard for points that are 3D in nature? Could refinement of one of the existing standards accomplish the same thing (ie add 'Mass Points' to the elevation standard and include additional optional elements like file format)

-If this standard moves forward it should be expressly limited to airborne LiDAR data. LiDAR technology encompasses multiple platforms (terrestrial, mobile, airborne) and these may have different needs than are covered by this proposed standard. As an example, the ASTM has recently adopted standard E2761 (aka E57 Format) which is for 3D imaging data from multiple technologies including laser scanners, 3D range cameras, and laser radar. Lecia, Optech and Riegl are examples of LiDAR manufacturers that have declared support for this standard. 

-The draft standard does not include a component for the LAS Header Block which is required for a LAS file to be correctly interpreted. For example, the draft standard states that the format for the X,Y,Z fields should be in the format 'Long', this does match the ASPRS standard. However, without the LAS Header Block fields X scale factor, Y scale factor, Z scale factor, the LAS point data (XYZ) can be misinterpreted because it has no decimal scale. 


Sorry I can't make it to discuss this in person...




Brady Callahan, GISP
GIS Program Leader
Oregon Parks & Recreation
725 Summer St NE, Ste C
Salem, OR 97301
brady.callahan at state.or.us

ph. 503-986-0783
fax. 503-986-0792


_______________________________________________
gpl_list mailing list
gpl_list at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/gpl_list
Hosted by the Oregon State Library