TOPOGRAPHIC DATABASES OF 10 000 IN EU COUNTRIES COMPARISON OF THE THEMATIC SCOPE
D.R. Dukaczewski1, E. Bielecka1, J. Bac - Bronowicz2
1 - IGiK - Institute of Geodesy and Cartography, Warsaw
2 - Agricultural University of Wrocіaw
One of the factors that can slow down the creation of a database is an excess of thematic information. The aim of this research was to compare the thematic scope of TBD – Polish Topographic Database with other European national topographic databases with the corresponding level of details and to analyse which TBD topographic objects should be obligatory or facultative. We also discuss the possibility of adding some objects into TBD. To achieve this goal, it was necessary: to identify similar topographic databases, to analyse their thematic scope, to create their typology, as well as to analyse the similarities and differences between the thematic scope of these databases and TBD.
The authors have compared and analysed the thematic scope of the Polish TBD and 11 of 18 identified 1: 10 000 (or bigger) scale European national civil vector topographic databases. Using the criteria of the number of topographic objects included in hierarchical object classification, as well as number of attribute groups and number of attributes, it is possible to distinguish 5 types of topographic databases.
The comparative analysis of the thematic scope of these databases brings us to the conclusion, that despite the particularities (concerning e.g. complexes of land cover and land use), the thematic scope of TDB is very similar to the databases like Czech ZABAGED, Belgian TOP 10v–GIS, and Lithuanian KDB10LT midi level. The scope of information available in this database seems to be not excessive, but rather average (comparing the TBD object and object attribute with our knowledge on topographic objects in Poland, and regarding the information which is available at topographic maps in analogue form).
The analysis has demonstrated that significant part EU vector topographic databases includes very interesting information, a part of which could be also very useful for the users of the TBD.
It is very difficult to propose the list of obligatory or facultative objects in TBD, because of the needs of users and necessity to assure the completeness of spatial information of the database. However, it is possible to generalise the part of TBD objects, as well as to consider the generalization of its object attributes. It seems also to be a good idea to ponder the problem of the completion of TBD using data collected in specialized databases.