[ORMAP-Tech] Cadastral Fit Proposals

[Steve Ganoe]

Sounds good to me.  On the Issue 2 proposals, I wanted to confirm a
couple of things just to make sure we're all talking about the same
things.
 
On Proposal 2: By "ORMAP cadastral standard" you mean the "Oregon
Cadastral Data Exchange Standard, ver. 2.0".
On Proposal 3: By "taxlot exchange standard" you mean the "Taxlot
Shapefile" section (3.4) of the OCDES, referenced in proposal 2.
 
I wanted to make sure you were not referencing the ORMAP-ESRI User
Group Geodatabase Design.
 
Thanks,
Steve
 
Steve Ganoe
GIS Analyst 3
Marion County
Ph: 503-373-4390

>>> "DEAN ANDERSON" <ANDERSON.DEAN at co.polk.or.us> 10/25/2010 9:39 AM
>>>

Issue 1: Cadastral FIT Organization 
------------------------------------------

I would like to propose..

a. We expand the ORMAP technical committee to also be the  Cadastral
Fit Committee. Our meetings are open to anyone and I assume interested
state agency folks that are already on the Cadastral FIT could come to
our meetings. 

b. The first item for business at the ORMAP technical committee
meetings could be the FIT meeting. This will allow interested state
agency folks to attend and then leave. (However, I feel it is  important
that these folks see what goes on in our meetings and that may help them
understand our issues better.)

c. Phill M. becomes the FIT Coordinator.  Phil is already coordinating
for us and he already facilitates our meetings. He is doing a good job
and I think if the countys can trust him to do our grants right we ought
to be able to trust him to represent us on FIT. 

It seems a little silly that we meet as ORMAP folks discuss proposals
and informally approve them so that another group can do the same thing.
 We already have an organization that cares deeply about the cadaster
and a coordinator doing a good job. I think one reason you may be having
problems filling this position is that it really appears to be
redundant.  I've checked on the FIT site on the DAS's site and it
appears that this would easily work within the FIT structure.  It does
not stop the other work groups from meeting (by the way I resigned from
the PLSS group years ago and the site has not been updated).  I would
assume that any issues with the PLSS framework would greatly impact our
group. 



Issue 2: Adopt Proposals 
------------------------------ 

At the recent ORMAP technical committee meeting it appears that we
approve the following proposals to be taken forward to the cadastral
fit. 

--> Proposal 1: Adopt WMS as the standard for publishing taxlot mapping
services. The "WMS" is an open source standard that should meet our
needs.  The standard is widely accepted, it is vendor neutral and allows
for graphic viewing and identifying of taxlots by service consumers. 

--> Proposal 2: Adopt the ORMAP cadastral standard (features and
attributes joined) as our content standard for publishing WMS's. 


--> Proposal 3: Expand the taxlot exchange standard to contain a field
called "referencelink" that is 254 characters  in length. 

--> Proposal 4: The "referencelink" field could contain three optional
values: a) a link to the county web site, b) a link to a
metadata/disclaimer description or c) a link to go directly to that
taxlot in the county web mapping site. 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/ormap-tech/attachments/20101025/1c1d1100/attachment.html>