12. Other Profiles: Graphic, Local Government, Mining, Utility, Hydrographic Vector, ...

A number of other SDTS profiles have been suggested over the past few years. Requirements for many of these may be met by the profiles mentioned earlier. The proposed object-based profile should meet most requirements related to these suggested profiles, and help future data sharing by keeping the number of profiles very low.

SDTS profiles for graphics (including text and symbols), for mining data, and for utility data have been suggested in the past, but there is little documented information on each of these at this time. A mining profile may have requirements for SDTS 3-D volumetric objects, similar to the CADD profile or a possible geology profile. Requirements for a utility profile may now be met by the CADD profile or the transportation network profile.

Some interest was expressed in the early 1990's by the Milwaukee County Automated Mapping and Land Information System (MCAMLIS) organization for a local government profile. Creation of an SDTS profile for local government GIS transactions was also suggested by Moyer and Niemann (1991).

Census is investigating use of SDTS for the distribution of governmental units and boundaries data as part of their Framework activities. No specific profile has been mentioned.

One GIS vendor is interested in a possible SDTS vector profile that allows topologically structured planar data, topologically structured non-planar (network) data, and non-topological (spaghetti) data all in the same SDTS transfer. This has been called a "mixed vector" profile. The feasibility of such a profile is currently under discussion as part of the object-based profile.

A "Hydrographic Vector Profile (HVP) to SDTS" study was conducted by IDON for NOAA in 1994. The resulting HVP was a DX-90 (now S-57 edition 3) profile to SDTS, similar to the DIGEST-A profile to SDTS. The study showed that the format of S-57 is very close to the structure of SDTS; closer than it is to DIGEST or VPF. The Corps of Engineers also had some interest in HVP as a way to help reconcile nautical chart formats between VPF/DNC and S-57. Although there are no plans to implement the HVP, the results may be useful in future ISO efforts to harmonize a number of similar standards including S-57, DIGEST, GDF, and SDTS.

An SDTS profile for ArcView SHAPE files was suggested but quickly discouraged, because the proliferation of SDTS profiles (especially if based on each vendor and product format) would not do much to improve data sharing and exchange.