FBIC GEOREFERENCING DATA COMMITTEE REPORT
Submitted by Kent Perkins, UF Herbarium
Meeting held November 9, 2000 at the
Florida Center for Library Automation
The FBIC GeoReferencing Committee met on November 9th to discuss the coordination of geographic data latitude and longitude data and metadata in FBIC databases.
Present at the meeting: Joe Aufmuth, F. Wayne King, Mary Ann O'Daniel, Ramon Ruiz-Carus and Kent Perkins.
1- Develop standards for coordinating latitude and longitude information in FBIC/LFNH-related databases and for sharing with non-FBIC/LFNH agencies.
2- Define formats for latitude and longitude information.
3- Define metadata fields necessary to qualify latitude and longitude information.
4- Develop a system which is flexible and simple, yet precise.
It is apparent to the committee that the issues concerning the recording of latitude and longitude data are complex. There needs to be an ongoing discussion and research in order to
devise a suitable system. Legacy data in databases presents a particular challenge.
---
A mailing list has been established to facilitate discussion and information sharing. The mailing list is:
FBIC-DATA-L mailing list ("Florida Biotic Information Consortium Data Group")
To subscribe send an email to:
with the message: subscribe FBIC-DATA-L (no subject needed, turn off your signature)
---
The following websites have been identified as useful resources:
Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
Biological Data Profile for the Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
The Darwin Core: (requires free The Species Analyst login)
International Working Group on Taxonomic Databases
HISPID 4 (Herbarium Information Standards and Protocols for Interchange of Data)
---
The following basic fields are being discussed as recommended:
Latitude: plus and minus up to 6 decimal degrees (e.g., -22.222222)
Longitude: plus and minus up to 6 decimal degrees (e.g., -222.222222)
Method of Recording: (1 character character field)
G = GPS
L = Loran
M = Map -> (specific scale?)
U = Unknown
O = Other
?->(how do we show when the decimal lat./long. are converted from other form of presentation?)
Usability: (numeric or 2 character character field?)
1 - country
2 - state
3 - region
4 - county
5 - place (geologic feature, town, defined section/township/range)
6 - state and drainage basin
7 - county and drainage basin
8 - state and lake
9 - county and lake
10 - state and linear (such as river)
11 - county and linear
12 - bay
13 - area of county
14 - area of state
?->(is this too complex? If we use numbers are we locking ourself in to a hierarchy?)
There are other important georeferencing elements which we will need to discuss and investigate:
Datum
Spheroid
Zone
UTM
Base Projection
Altitude and altitude-related metadata
Depth and depth-related metadata
The objectives of the committee are: