|
RE: geodatabase
|
Deanne DiPietro
|
Jan 31, 2005 19:59 PST
|
I understand that the service packs that are out now have the situation
under control, and we here at Sonoma Ecology Center may be making our
move to 9 real soon.
On the topic of geodatabases, I got a call from Judy Wartella with
Redwood National Park Service, asking about weed mapping and the use of
a geodatabase. I was telling her about Erin Stockenberg/FWS's Arc 9
geodatabase, and that we had talked about matching up the data model
with the WIMS relational database.
What we might want is an exchange format that would go across formats
and platforms. This is being investigated at ICE. I remember Erin
showing some of us a data model description that seemed like a great
thing to use to decide about the core fields, tables, and relationships
that we want to share across formats. I'm thinking that we can
cooperatively develop a data model, since we're still all pretty much
deciding on the best ways to handle the data.
Erin, do you think you can share the geodatabase schema you showed us a
couple months ago, or is it ready?
Deanne
Deanne
Maggi Kelly wrote:
| |
Hi all,
I am also trepidatious about moving forward with 9 for the reasons Rosie
outlined. I plan on biting the bullet in the new year. Has anyone out
there
any success stories to relate?
Maggi
Maggi Kelly
Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management Department
University of California, Berkeley
http://kellylab.berkeley.edu
Mailing address:
145 Mulford #3114
Berkeley CA 94720-3114
510.642.7272
510.642.1477 fax
mke-@nature.berkeley.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Rosie Yacoub [mailto:RYac-@cdfa.ca.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 8:51 AM
To: CalWeed-@topica.com; sec-d-@vom.com
Subject: geodatabase
I think it is worth looking at generally, since my guess is there is a
lot
of capacity for capturing nuances in a geodatabase with respect to
time-series, treatments, relations with other species that might be
difficult to replicate using flat files (shapefiles). Some of this can
be
done by integrating a .dbf into an Access database, but not all of it.
Since ArcGIS 9 and 8 don't seem to be easily backwards/forwards
compatible ,
I am interested in knowing how many people are moving on to 9 and when.
At
CDFA, we are considering it right now, so the question is a very timely
one
for us. I'd say were thinking about it, and if we do so, we would
likely
get it going by March or April of next year.
-----------------------------------------------
This message brought to you by the Cal-IPC Weed Mapping Committee's
CalWeedMapping listserv.
http://www.cal-ipc.org
|
|
|
 |
|
