Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Geosphere Email Content Delivery
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Geosphere; April 2008; v. 4; no. 2; p. 354-359; DOI: 10.1130/GES00158.1
© 2008 Geological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, R. R.
Right arrow Articles by Holdsworth, R. E.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Describing the dimensionality of geospatial data in the earth sciences—Recommendations for nomenclature

Richard R. Jones1, Tim F. Wawrzyniec2, Nicolas S. Holliman3, Kenneth J.W. McCaffrey4, Jonathan Imber4 and Robert E. Holdsworth4

1 Geospatial Research Ltd., Department of Earth Sciences, and e-Science Research Institute, University of Durham, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK
2 Lidar Laboratory, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of New Mexico, 141 Northrop Hall, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA
3 e-Science Research Institute, University of Durham, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK
4 Reactivation Research Group, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Durham, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK

Complications exist when describing the dimensionality of geoscientific data sets. One difficulty is that there are a number of different, valid ways to consider dimensionality. Unlike traditional methods of field data capture, modern digital methods typically record the position of every sample point relative to a three-dimensional (3D) coordinate system, even for simple measurement strategies such as 1D line sampling. Critically, the best way to describe the dimensionality of a data set will depend on the context in which the data are presented. Terms such as "21/2D" are generally inappropriate for nonspecialist audiences. Because ambiguity and inconsistency are already widespread, it is usually advisable to explain clearly the nature of each data set, the method used to capture the data, and particularly whether data acquisition was restricted to the outcrop surface or includes sampling of the subsurface.

Keywords: geological representation • digital surveying methods • virtual outcrop models • dimension • coordinate axes







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by Geological Society of America