Interlinking geospatial and building geometry with existing and developing standards on the web

Abstract Geometric data plays a central role in the geospatial domain, architectural design and construction industry. For upcoming, new approaches to store building data, such as the Semantic Web, no universal common agreement exists on the combination of geometric and non-geometric data. It can therefore be unclear to users on how to represent their geometries, leading to a decelerated application and advancement of making building data available over the web. This gap can only be bridged if a common approach on the representation of geometries on the web is achieved. To first generate a common understanding of geometry representations, an overview of existing and developing geometry (web) standards needs to be given and discussed, i.e., the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC), CityGML, GeoSPARQL, and the OntoBREP and GEOM ontologies. This discussion needs to consider general contexts, e.g., 2D, 3D, detailed, or tessellated geometries, and specific use cases of the construction industry. Based on these discussions, this paper aims to propose a general recommendation for web-based geometry representations to enhance future applications of building data on the web. Due to the variety of use cases and their requirements, as well as technical constraints based on deviant interpretations of geometry descriptions from different geometry kernels, it became clear, that no approach or standard is generally superior to others. The biggest distinction identified in this paper is posed between the context of visualizing, where simplified, tessellated geometry holds the highest advantage, and (parametric) modeling, which requires semantically detailed geometry representations. Hence, we recommend to interlink non-geometric data with multiple geometry representations, to address all relevant contexts and use cases appropriately. The individual geometry representations should be chosen based on the relevant use cases for an optimal experience when using and exchanging geometry on the web. With this recommendation, the benefits of all discussed approaches can be exploited while avoiding their respective challenges.

[1]  Jan Karlshøj,et al.  Proposing a Central AEC Ontology That Allows for Domain Specific Extensions , 2017 .

[2]  Jan Karlshøj,et al.  Demo: Integrating Building Information Modeling and Sensor Observations using Semantic Web , 2018 .

[3]  Chi Zhang,et al.  BimSPARQL: Domain-specific functional SPARQL extensions for querying RDF building data , 2018, Semantic Web.

[4]  Tom Heath,et al.  Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space , 2011, Linked Data.

[5]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  The SSN ontology of the W3C semantic sensor network incubator group , 2012, J. Web Semant..

[6]  Ana Roxin,et al.  A performance benchmark over semantic rule checking approaches in construction industry , 2017, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[7]  Fulvio Corno,et al.  DogOnt - Ontology Modeling for Intelligent Domotic Environments , 2008, SEMWEB.

[8]  Pieter Pauwels,et al.  A Method to Generate a Modular ifcOWL Ontology , 2017, JOWO.

[9]  Alois Knoll,et al.  An ontology for CAD data and geometric constraints as a link between product models and semantic robot task descriptions , 2015, 2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[10]  Uwe Rüppel,et al.  SolConPro: Describing multi-functional building products using semantic web technologies , 2018, eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction.

[11]  Joerg Swetina,et al.  Toward a standardized common M2M service layer platform: Introduction to oneM2M , 2014, IEEE Wireless Communications.

[12]  Charles M. Eastman,et al.  BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors , 2008 .

[13]  Pieter Pauwels,et al.  Semantic web technologies in AEC industry: A literature overview , 2017 .

[14]  Jasper Roes,et al.  Created in Close Interaction with the Industry: The Smart Appliances REFerence (SAREF) Ontology , 2015, FOMI.

[15]  Jakob Beetz,et al.  Querying linked building data using SPARQL with functional extensions , 2016 .

[16]  Rik Van de Walle,et al.  Three-dimensional information exchange over the semantic web for the domain of architecture, engineering, and construction , 2011, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[17]  Christophe Debruyne,et al.  Integrating Building Information Models with Authoritative Irish Geospatial Information , 2017, International Semantic Web Conference.

[18]  Christophe Debruyne,et al.  Integrating Ireland's Geospatial Information to Provide Authoritative Building Information Models , 2017, SEMANTICS.

[19]  Laila M. Khodeir,et al.  Integrating HBIM (Heritage Building Information Modeling) Tools in the Application of Sustainable Retrofitting of Heritage Buildings in Egypt , 2016 .

[20]  Chimay J. Anumba,et al.  Mapping between BIM and 3D GIS in different levels of detail using schema mediation and instance comparison , 2016 .

[21]  Li Zhu,et al.  Building Interior Model Interpolation between IFC and CityGML , 2015 .

[22]  Uwe Rüppel,et al.  A Multi-Agent-Based Platform for the Early Integration of Photovoltaic Systems in Building Façades , 2016 .

[23]  Pieter Pauwels,et al.  EXPRESS to OWL for construction industry: Towards a recommendable and usable ifcOWL ontology , 2016 .

[24]  André Borrmann,et al.  A Spatio-Semantic Query Language for the Integrated Analysis of City Models and Building Information Models , 2017 .

[25]  Jörg Verstraete Dealing with Rounding Errors in Geometry Processing , 2015, FQAS.

[26]  Vladimir Bazjanac,et al.  Bim – Geometry Modeling Guidelines For Building Energy Performance Simulation , 2013, Building Simulation Conference Proceedings.

[27]  Jantien E. Stoter,et al.  Automatic conversion of IFC datasets to geometrically and semantically correct CityGML LOD3 buildings , 2016, Trans. GIS.

[28]  Pieter Pauwels,et al.  Linked building data for modular building information modelling of a smart home , 2018, eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction.

[29]  Javier Irizarry,et al.  Extending BIM interoperability to preconstruction operations using geospatial analyses and semantic web services , 2015 .

[30]  Tim Berners-Lee,et al.  Linked Data - The Story So Far , 2009, Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst..

[31]  Antoine Zimmermann,et al.  Supporting Arbitrary Custom Datatypes in RDF and SPARQL , 2016, ESWC.

[32]  Pieter Pauwels,et al.  Enhancing the ifcOWL ontology with an alternative representation for geometric data , 2017 .