=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2744/short22
|storemode=property
|title=Geoportals as Sources of Information About the Territory (short paper)
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2744/short22.pdf
|volume=Vol-2744
|authors=Grigory Lobanov,Olga Moskalenko
}}
==Geoportals as Sources of Information About the Territory (short paper)==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2744/short22.pdf
Geoportals as Sources of Information About the
Territory
Grigory Lobanov[0000-0003-3764-7804], Olga Moskalenko[0000-0003-1520-9926]
Bryansk State Academician I.G. Petrovski University,
Russia, 241036, Bryansk, Bezhitskaya str., 14
lobanov_grigorii@mail.ru, asik54@mail.ru
Abstract. The object of the article are popular geoportals (Yandex Maps, Google
maps, 2GIS) as terrain models. The definition of geoportals and their structure
and functions are described. It is noted that due to the high rate of development
of the structure and content of geoportals, their functional capabilities and prop-
erties as an information resource do not have a sufficient scientific and method-
ological description. The content, functionality, and semiotics of geoportals are
described. Special features of transmitting positional and attribute characteristics
of natural and economic objects are noted; the significance of the main methods
of automatic collection of information about the territory is revealed; five systems
of conventional signs used in geoportals to create an image of the territory are
identified and described. Similarities and differences of geoportals with tradi-
tional spatial models-topographic plans, geographic and thematic maps and plans
are considered. The role of users in shaping the content, structure, and functional
capabilities of geoportals is shown. Possible directions of development of geo-
portals sources as sources of terrain data are discussed.
Keywords: Geoportals, Hybrid Geoimages, Sign Systems, Cartographic
Works, Information.
1 Introduction
Geoportals are a type of information resources that provide integration, visualiza-
tion, updating and dissemination of spatial data based on Internet technologies [1, 2, 3,
4]. From the point of view of Geoinformatics theory, geoportals are a variant of network
GIS, which are characterized by a large volume of integrated data, intuitively under-
standable interface aimed at users without special training, and a small set of functions
for automatic spatial analysis. Geoportals are widely used in solving scientific, indus-
trial and household tasks as a source of detailed information about the area and a means
of managing geographical data. Popular cartographic services provide customizable
1
visualization of geo-images (maps, satellite images, and their hybrids); search for ter-
rain features, interactive navigation in the image space; cartometric operations; adding
Copyright c 2019 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
2 G. Lobanov, O. Moskalenko
new objects by users, and some elements of mathematical cartographic modeling (gen-
eration of profiles, visibility-invisibility zones). The term "geo-image" here refers to
photographic (space, aerial photos) and figurative-symbolic (maps) models of the
earth's surface, which convey the relative location, size, distinctive features and prop-
erties (attributes) of objects located on it [5].
The relevance of the idea of geoportals as integrators of information about the area
is confirmed by the development of existing and new information resources. The quan-
tity and quality of spatial data is growing on existing resources, and services for man-
aging them are becoming more diverse and convenient. However, even the most popu-
lar resources are not without disadvantages, which are often manifested in solving re-
search and production tasks. This circumstance is associated with the prospects for the
development of new information resources. In particular, the digital Earth project as-
sumes high spatial resolution and rapid updating of remote sensing data that make up a
significant part of the volume of information about the area on geoportals.
Trends in the evolution of the content, design, and management tools of geoportals
allow us to believe that it is a leading factor in the mass demand of users for information
about the area and services that provide work with it. At the same time, the continuity
of geoportals from the spatial models of classical cartography is obvious, first of all,
similar to them in the content and purpose of topographic maps and plans. The main
content of classical and modern models is information about the mutual location, con-
figuration, quantitative and qualitative properties of the earth's surface objects.
The study and reflection of the possibilities, prospects and limitations of using geo-
portals as spatial models does not keep pace with the pace of their technological im-
provement. The situation reflects the action of several factors: the development of com-
puter graphics and modeling tools, the growth of the possibilities of computer networks
in transmitting large amounts of information; the lack of a conceptual cartography ap-
paratus for describing modern spatial models, and finally, the novelty of the process of
their interactive construction by users. The relevance of studying and reflecting on the
experience of using geoportals is not limited to theoretical interest, but is related to the
search for promising directions for their development. This article presents the results
of studying the properties of geoportals as spatial models, based on many years of ex-
perience in solving geographical research problems.
2 Research objects
Spatial models placed on geoportals are represented by geo-images of different
origin and level of generalization, reduced to a single mathematical basis and consistent
in design. The model space can be completely or partially filled with image elements.
In the first case, these are "tiles" that make up satellite images or map images of differ-
ent levels of generalization ("schematic") in the most common definition. In the second
case, these are vector, raster, or 3D objects localized in space. Similar objects make up
the main structural elements of the spatial model-layers of the electronic map. Combi-
nations of layers form so-called hybrid geo-images. The structure described above is
Geoportals as Sources of Information About the Territory 3
implemented in the most popular geoportals – Yandex maps, Google Earth, 2GIS, SAS-
planet, based on the experience of using them, the results obtained below [6, 7, 8, 9].
3 Results and discussion
Features of geoportals, as well as other spatial models, are revealed by three key
properties: the content of information about the area, functionality, and semiotics.
Information about the area presented on geoportals includes primarily topographic
information – i.e., positional (configuration, position in space) and attribute character-
istics (properties) of objects on the earth's surface. The characteristics of the objects to
vary in detail. Positional characteristics of natural and social objects with clear bound-
aries are transmitted with great accuracy and detail (in accordance with the resolution
of satellite images), including: residential and industrial buildings, transport networks,
and hydrographic networks. There are two ways to transmit information about relief on
geoportals. The first is indirectly, through the change of surface types, which reflects
the change of natural conditions, and, consequently, the change of landscapes. A large
number of assumptions and uncertainties in this chain partially compensate for the sec-
ond method - through information about the heights of individual points above sea
level, which are reported on geoportals that use DEM data. Both data sources transmit
surface morphology implicitly and in this sense are inferior to topographic plans and
maps as terrain models (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1. Differences in representation of surface morphology on topographic maps and geoportals.
The actual height difference between the river valley and the watershed (about 45 m) in the sat-
ellite image is expressed indirectly by the arable areas in the upper – left corner.
Attribute characteristics are given mainly for objects in the service sector, in much
more detail than on topographic maps. Information about the properties of hydrological
objects, the composition and quality of vegetation, the purpose and performance char-
acteristics of engineering structures (bridges, roads, Railways, industrial enterprises)
that are typical for topographic and survey maps is not explicitly present on geoportals.
The functionality of geoportals as spatial models is most clearly shown in the auto-
mation of methods for obtaining information about the area. Automation largely deter-
mines the advantage and popularity of geoportals as sources of geographical infor-
mation over cartographic works. In our opinion, three functions are most important:
4 G. Lobanov, O. Moskalenko
integration of geo-images of different scales, object search, and interactive planning
and altitude measurements.
The first function is essential for performing classical tasks of geography - evaluat-
ing and describing the location of an object or territory. This function is provided by an
interactive transition between scales, which allows you to see the regularities of the
relative location of objects in the space and the features of the territory structure. Before
creating geoportals, similar tasks were solved by comparing maps of different scales.
Individual cartographic works provide a complete perception of areas from the first tens
to several hundred thousand square kilometers. Changing the scale provides a gradual
"immersion in the area", revealing the image of the territory.
The second function develops and automates methods for working with geographical
name indexes, which are usually included in atlases for orientation on small-and me-
dium - scale General geographic maps. On large-scale (topographical) maps, geograph-
ical names are not used-the search is performed within the borders of the sheets (in
accordance with the purpose of the map), so it is often very time-consuming. Geoportals
provide search for objects by accessing extensive databases of spatial data that contain
the coordinates of the largest (most popular) part of objects mapped on topographic
maps and plans, including: small settlements, rivers and lakes, individual structures and
enterprises, roads and streets. However, the spatial databases of geoports do not yet
contain certain types of objects, both those included in the state registers of geograph-
ical names (for example, tracts) and others marked on topographic maps (in particular,
forest management blocks).
The third function significantly reduces the complexity of various cartometric oper-
ations-measuring distances, areas, and heights. At the same time, technological and
methodological features of interactive measurements form the problem of correct inter-
pretation of morphometric differences in the characteristics of the same objects on topo-
graphic materials and hybrid images. The need for comparisons is due to a very com-
mon way to assess the dynamics of objects-by comparing their borders on different-
time images. Usually topographic maps and plans created several decades ago are com-
pared with recent high-resolution satellite images. The difference in morphometric
characteristics, in addition to the actual changes in time, is due to the generalization of
the image of the borders of objects on topographical materials. Especially cartographic
generalization distorts the contours of small objects with a complex configuration of
channels of small rivers, the shoreline of lakes. Satellite images, on the other hand,
convey the configuration in as much detail as possible, so that the results of quantifying
changes are often uncertain and replaced with qualitative indicators.
Semiotic features of geoportals consist in the use of different, complementary sign
systems. Technological solutions of the most popular geoportals allow us to talk about
five mutually fulfilling sign systems that differ in their purpose, level of development
and way of perception of information about the area. Individual geoportals implement
their capabilities differently, specializing in either visual effects (Google Earth) or de-
tailed descriptions (Yandex maps).
The first system is formed by satellite images that fill the model space. Images con-
vey the features of the area through the mutual location and the ratio of different types
of surface - forest, open space, industrial and civil development. Potentially, satellite
Geoportals as Sources of Information About the Territory 5
images in ultra-high and high resolution contain more information than General geo-
graphic maps, the saturation of which is limited by a group of factors-from the size of
the sheet, the criteria and standards for selecting objects to the difficulties of psycho-
logical perception of complex signs. However, the identification, as well as the quanti-
tative and qualitative characteristics of objects depicted on satellite images, without
much experience in decryption are determined approximately. Fragments of satellite
images can often not be reliably identified without extensive user experience in work-
ing with remote sensing materials.
The second system is formed by conventional signs of electronic maps, which com-
plement satellite images and provide recognition of objects that are most in demand by
users. Electronic maps are the most informative elements of the spatial model. The sys-
tem is based on associative signs, which are supplemented with interactive descriptions,
photos, and dynamic elements. Extensions report important consumer properties of ob-
jects, such as opening hours, quality of services, and availability. The idea of some
properties of objects is formed only visually. For example, the characteristics of high-
ways on the Yandex maps geoportal are displayed via photos. The description of objects
that are less interesting to the average user – undeveloped territories, agricultural land-
scapes, woodlands and water areas-is limited by their belonging to administrative divi-
sions and their names (if available). The system of symbols for electronic maps is sig-
nificantly simpler in comparison with topographic maps and plans. First, the number of
variants of signs does not exceed the first dozen, whereas on topographic maps and
plans about 500 are used [10, 11]. Signs on electronic maps are used primarily to indi-
cate objects of buildings and services, while numerous engineering structures and nat-
ural objects are ignored by developers of electronic maps (Fig. 2). Secondly, the internal
structure of conventional signs that allows you to convey a variety of properties of the
same type of objects (for example, roads, borders, engineering structures) is not used.
The simplicity of the system of symbols is confirmed by the absence or very simple
version of the legend without additional explanations.
The third system consists of hyperlinks to photos and video clips, designed as place-
marks. The density of signs indirectly characterizes the suitability, significance and
popularity of objects for recreation and tourism. The fourth and fifth systems are three-
dimensional objects and terrain models that form the presence effect. Specific infor-
mation in this system, as well as in satellite images, is not clearly present - through a
visa-assessed level of improvement, the attractiveness of architecture. Currently, the
development of systems is technologically limited to the most populated and accessible
areas – localities and territories adjacent to roads with good quality coverage. The third
system consists of hyperlinks to photos and video clips, designed as placemarks. The
density of signs indirectly characterizes the suitability, significance and popularity of
objects for recreation and tourism. The fourth and fifth systems are three-dimensional
objects and terrain models that form the presence effect. Specific information in this
system, as well as in satellite images, is not clearly present - through a visa-assessed
level of improvement, the attractiveness of architecture. Currently, the development of
systems is technologically limited to the most populated and accessible areas – locali-
ties and territories adjacent to roads with good quality coverage.
6 G. Lobanov, O. Moskalenko
Fig. 2. Features of information about the area on Yandex maps. The points of interest and objects
of the service sector are marked. Information about the landscape, road network features (terrain,
water feature) is not explicitly expressed.
The features listed above and a number of other factors that are not directly related
to the properties of geoportals allowed these information resources to significantly dis-
place map models as a source of information about the area. Topographic maps and
plans retain the most stable positions as sources of quantitative information, primarily
about natural objects. The content of topographic maps and plans was formed on the
basis of integration of various data sources - geodetic survey, land management, forest
management, hydrological measurements, stock engineering materials. Geoportals al-
low you to integrate information from these sources in thematic layers, although the
task of repeating, and possibly surpassing topographic maps and plans for the amount
of special information can be considered only as one of the likely directions for the
development of modern spatial models. The scale and complexity of data integration is
justified by a significant increase in the efficiency of theoretical and applied geograph-
ical research.
4 Conclusion
The formation of popular geoportals as sources of information follows changes in
society, summarized in the results of sociological research [12]. Free labor migration,
readiness to change places of life and work, popularity of tourist trips and trips creates
a demand for accessible and easy-to-use information resources about the world from
people with different levels of geographical, including cartographic literacy. The huge
volume of previously created cartographic images and satellite images, combined with
Geoportals as Sources of Information About the Territory 7
computer processing tools, ensures that the demand is met through the organization of
geoportals.
The content, design methods and technologies for managing geoportals are still
formed intuitively, in active interaction with visitors, but based on the experience of
traditional "paper" cartography. In the presentation of information, the utilitarian ap-
proach prevails – in models of the surrounding world on geoportals, techniques of "clas-
sic" cartographic research and graphic tools are used, which provide the consumer with
a visual representation of the area and fast, simple navigation [13]. The probability of
incorrectly determining the properties or location of objects is minimized.
Geo-images undergo a kind of user-generated generalization – graphical variables
of conventional signs or additional visual means highlight objects that have the greatest
value and (or) attractiveness, while others are hidden against the General background.
At the same time, the local use of cartographic works and satellite images in hybrid
geo-images has created an interesting phenomenon – a huge amount of potentially
available information (about the relationships of objects and the laws of spatial place-
ment), the demand and availability of which increases depending on the user's training
and experience.
In the near future, the growth of integration of terrain data in geoportals will face
new restrictions and scientific and methodological tasks that require original algo-
rithms. The nature of the sources of restrictions differs significantly. To convey some
information about the natural landscape (soil, vegetation), detailed research materials
are not available; for elements of the cultural landscape, on the contrary, special ap-
proaches will be required to visualize a lot of factual information (including difficult to
formalize, for example, expert assessments of the attractiveness of the landscape); for
territories in General, the problem will be the need to create" convenient " for electronic
mapping of localized objects and phenomena and generalized properties of large areas
of terrain. The prospects for the development of geoportals are associated with the con-
struction of semantic links of geographical objects placed on different information re-
sources. It is probably the search for ways to integrate geographical information that
will enrich the science of geographical systems with new ideas [14, 15, 16, 17].
References
1. Antonov, V., Zatyagalova, V., Zahvatov, M., Pyatkin, F.: Geoportal kak tochka vhoda v
infrastrukturu prostranstvennyh dannyh. Interekspo Geo-Sibir 1, 1-4 (2014). In Russ.
2. Kadochnikov A., Yakubaylik, O.: Servis-orientirovannye web-sistemy dlya obra-botki ge-
oprostranstvennyh dannyh. Vestnik NGU. Seriya: Informacionnye tekhno-logii 1, 37-45
(2015). In Russ.
3. Maguire, J., Longley, A.: The emergence of geoportals and their role in spatial data infra-
structures. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 29, 3-14 (2005).
4. Tait, G.: Implementing geoportals: applications of distributed GIS. Computers, Environ-
ment and Urban Systems 29, 33-47 (2005).
5. Berlyant A.M.: Teoriya geoizobrazhenij. GEOS, Moscow (2006). In Russ.
6. SASGIS Homepage, http://www.sasgis.org/ last accessed 2020/06/11.
7. 2 GIS Homepage, https://2gis.ru/ last accessed 2020/06/15.
8 G. Lobanov, O. Moskalenko
8. GoogleMaps Homepage, http://www.google.ru/maps/ last accessed 2020/07/05.
9. Yandex Karty Homepage, https://yandex.ru/maps/ last accessed 2020/07/10.
10. Uslovnye znaki dlya topograficheskoj karty masshtaba 1:10000. «Nedra» (Glavnoe uprav-
lenie geodezii i kartografii pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR), Moscow (1977). In Russ
11. Uslovnye znaki topograficheskih planov dlya topograficheskih planov masshtabov 1:5000,
1:2000, 1:1000, 1:500. Nedra (Glavnoe upravlenie geodezii i kartografii pri Sovete Min-
istrov SSSR), Moscow (1977). In Russ.
12. Urri, J.: Mobil'nosti. Praksis, Moscow (2002). In Russ.
13. Lisitsky, D., Katsko, S.: Naznachenie i osobennosti cifrovogo kartograficheskogo izobra-
zheniya v geoinformacionnom kartografirovanii. Interekspo Geo-Sibir' 4, 22-28 (2005). In
Russ.
14. Matveev, A., Yakubaylik, O.: Razrabotka veb-prilozheniya dlya obrabotki i predstavleniya
prostranstvennyh metadannyh geoportala. Sibirskij zhurnal nauki i tekhnologij 2 (42), 48-
54 (2012). In Russ.
15. Bogdanovic, M., Stanimirovi, A., Stoimenov, L.: Methodology for geospatial data source
discovery in ontology driven geoinformation integration architectures. Web Semantics:
Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 32, 1-15 (2015).
16. Peisheng, Zh., Liping, Di., Genong, Yu., Peng, Yu., Yaxing, W., Wenli, Y.: Semantic Web-
based geospatial knowledge transformation. Computers & Geosciences 35, 798–808
(2009).
17. Reitsma F., Laxton J., Ballard S., Kuhn W., Abdelmoty A.: Semantics, ontologies and eSci-
ence for the geosciences. Computers & Geosciences 35, 706 –709 (2009).