Standards (norms) for decoding aerial data
Good afternoon, please tell me which regulatory legal acts (standards) I need to pay attention (study) to decode Aerial data according to US regulations.
For the last 3 years I have been decoding orthoimage + DEM, DTM, DSM into 2D layers (planimetric layers), 3D layers, breaklines, TIN-model.
By profession, I am a topographer with experience in Israel, our decoding requirements are slightly different.
I found the ALTA/NSPS, ASPRS standards, but from the initial study of these standards I am already dizzy.
The main problem I encountered is that my mentors ask that I, for example, decode road markings less accurately than curbs or roads. They explain this by the fact that such scrupulousness is not needed. Or, for example, when decoding orthoimage, I often come across objects that I cannot accurately identify. In such cases, I check all dubious objects on Google Street View or Bing (from a bird's eye view), but I am still dissatisfied, as they believe that this is not necessary. I worked as a topographer for 20 years, usually we worked with a total station or GPS equipment and got used to doing everything correctly and very, very scrupulously. I have a huge contradiction when they explain to me that planimetric layers or a topographic plan made on the basis of Aerial data do not need to be checked on other data sources (Google Street View). Or, for example, there are cases when the road (roadbed) has defects, but the employer insists that in these places the "Road Edge" layer has a straight line or a line with the fewest points, but my conscience does not allow me to draw a road without these defects.
I would be very grateful for your help
You can look through the Federal Geographic Data Committee papers, parts one, two and three.
Generally, it's up to the professional who is certifying a given data set or map to understand the relationship between map scale and the accuracy of topographic features.
What are the maps being used for and are you certain that absolute accuracy is essential to the map's main purpose?
You may find that a lack of clarity, in regards to standards you've previously relied on, will open the door for you to help your team develop better mapping protocols. Conversely, you may find that the old way you performed your tasks was unnecessarily detailed. If you're new to America, you might look into contrasting American engineering to German engineering in WWII for examples of how culture influences problem solving. A gross simplification would be that America produced vehicles that didn't excel at any given performance metric (speed, target acquisition, ranges, etc.) but were easily repaired even when original parts were unobtainable. Germany produced high performance vehicles that required strict maintenance and specialty parts that were not easily repaired in the field. Maybe there are cultural reasons that influence differences between you and your mentor's value of mapping detail. I wish you the best, it's quite frustrating to care about something that others dismiss as unimportant.
