Writing section GeoSPARQL 3D Requirements

[RolfJonker]

Contributors:

@situx @peterrdf @aothms @pipauwel @ldesousa

[RolfJonker]

Create Subsections @pipauwel

[pipauwel]

Please see pull request: https://github.com/opengeospatial/geosparql3dwhitepaper/blob/pipauwel-patch-1 and more specifically the bottom section of https://github.com/opengeospatial/geosparql3dwhitepaper/blob/pipauwel-patch-1/document/sections/05-geosparql3D.adoc.

@aothms : can you write a suggestion of text in section 5.2?

I'll ask @AlexDonkers to write text in Section 5.3.

@ar-chad: What are your intentions with the content in Section 5.1?

[FransKnibbe]

I wonder if sections Extension 5: Positioning of 3D geometries and Extension 7: Alignments of Engineering CRS to Geospatial CRS can be merged. Aren't they essentially about the same thing?

[ar-chad]

Please see pull request: https://github.com/opengeospatial/geosparql3dwhitepaper/blob/pipauwel-patch-1 and more specifically the bottom section of https://github.com/opengeospatial/geosparql3dwhitepaper/blob/pipauwel-patch-1/document/sections/05-geosparql3D.adoc.

@aothms : can you write a suggestion of text in section 5.2?

I'll ask @AlexDonkers to write text in Section 5.3.

@ar-chad: What are your intentions with the content in Section 5.1?

@pipauwel I wanted to describe the 3D use cases. My idea was also to include some motivation - being able to solve some business problems within AECO. I see quite a lot of those use cases is already added there. I'll check out if there is anything missing and add the motivation there. So we will have requirements more like user stories.

[FransKnibbe]

As talked about at the meeting on 2025-05-07: It would be good to have the following for each requirement:

• An indication of desirability (provided by use cases and (potential) users)
• An indication of feasibilty (provided by the GeoSPARQL team)

[ar-chad]

Pull request #29