The United States Thoroughfare Landmark and Postal Address Data

Document Sample
The United States Thoroughfare Landmark and Postal Address Data Powered By Docstoc
					 The United States Thoroughfare,
Landmark and Postal Address Data

              Presentation to:
          FGDC Coordination Group
           By URISA International
              March 16, 2010
                  Presented by
     URISA Address Standard Working Group
  (Martha McCart Wells, Ed Wells, Carl Anderson,
           Sara Yurman, Hilary Perkins)‫‏‬
      One Standard, Four Parts
   Address Data Content
   Address Data Classification
   Address Data Quality
   Address Data Exchange
   Built on previous drafts
   URISA petitioned FGDC for the opportunity
    to develop this standard. Granted in 2005.
   URISA Address Standard Working Group
    prepared this standard with the help of
    address creators and managers throughout
    the United States
       Volunteer, community-based process
              Table of Contents
   1 Introduction
   2 Address Data Content
       Address Elements
       Address Reference Systems
       Address Attributes
   3 Address Data Classification
       Thoroughfare Class
       Landmark Class
       Postal Class
       General Class
              Table of Contents
   4 Address Data Quality
       Introduction
       Anomalies: Uncertainty and Addresses
       Measuring Address Quality
       Using the Measures in a Quality Control
       Quality Measures
   5 Address Data Exchange
       Structure of a Transfer Package
       The Address Standard XSD (See Part 7 for
        complete XSD Document)‫‏‬
               Table of Contents
   Part 6: References
   Part 7 Appendices
       Appendix A (Normative): Normative XSD
       Appendix B (Informative):Address XML Examples
       Appendix C (Informative): Table of Element Relationships
       Appendix D (Informative): Relationship of
        Addresses to Transportation Features and Linear
        Reference Locations
       Appendix E (Informative): Element Measure Index
       Appendix F (Informative): Attribute Measure Index
       Appendix G (Informative): Classification Measure Index
       Appendix H (Informative): Quality Measures By Data Quality
       Appendix I (Informative): Compatibility of the Address
        Standard with the FGDC Geographic Information Framework
        Data Content Standard for the NDSI
Standard Development Process
   Grass-roots approach
       Two drafts circulated through URISA Web Site
        (over 400 comments received on these drafts)‫‏‬
       Over 40 presentations of Standard in progress
        (URISA, NSGIC, NENA, state, regional, and
        national conferences, GSDI and ISO
       Two webinars presented through URISA
   Use of Wiki Site
       Over 500 people signed up to view and comment
        on site
   Teleconferences, emails and conversations
    with practitioners
         Coordination with Other
   Standards Referenced
       FGDC Standards Reference Model
       FGDC Metadata Standard
       FGDC Framework Standard (especially Base Part,
        Cadastral and Transportation)‫‏‬
       ANSI - FIPS
       USPS Publication 28
       NENA Next Generation 911 Address Exchange
       XML, GML, SQL
       Approximately 25 other standards consulted
   Meetings with other Standards bodies
       NENA, USPS, ISO, FGDC Subcommittees and
        Standards Maintenance Authorities
   Two profiles of the standard to coordinate
    with specific use cases:
       USPS
           Worked with Postal Service to coordinate USPS
            Publication 28 and UPU Standards
       NENA
           Worked with NENA to update their address standard
            and coordinate profiles to manage emergency
            address uses
   Profiles both extend and restrict the ways in
    which the standard is applied to these cases.
   Acceptance by FGDC Coordination Group (3/16/2010)‫‏‬
   Public Review Process (90 days, ending on or before
   Comment Adjudication (30 to 90 days, depending on
    number and substance of comments, ending on or before
   Final version and adjudicated comments report to Standard
    Working Group (on or before 9/30/2010)‫‏‬
   Standards Working Group Approval (on or before
   Approval by Coordination Group (14 day review, on or
    before 11/15/2010)‫‏‬
   Approval by Steering Committee (30 day review, electronic
    ballot or meeting, on or before 12/30/2010)‫‏‬
   Signature by Chair, FGDC Steering Committee and
    publication (1/15/2011)‫‏‬

Dates are for calendar years 2010 and 2011
    Benefits of an Address Data
   Addresses are the most commonly used and
    well-known identifier of the location of
    people, places and events
   Created, maintained and used by virtually all
    local governments
   Ability to share and manage address data is
    a critical need for all levels of government
   Known value to the geospatial community
       Draft versions already in use, and adopted by
        some states and local governments.
   The SWG recommends that the U.S.
    Thoroughfare, Landmark, and Postal
    Address (Address) Standard be released
    through the FGDC standards process for 90-
    day public review.

   VOTE ACTION: By simple majority of CG
    Primary members, should the Address
    Standard be released for a 90-day public