Karaganda city digitalization was done by request
of the DATA+ joint ventures. The goal was to form the topological
basement of the GIS created for the Center of Operational Information
at the city police service. For more detailed description of this
GIS see the article published in ARCREVIEW N2 (2003) by Genadiy
Radionov, key expert of DATA+.
The project was remarkable for its terms and process layout. We
delivered material to the customer in parts as it was divided in
five fragments, and every delivered fragment was immediately added
to the GIS being created. So, returns and revisions were out of
the question. Besides these draconian terms, the order of data transmission
caused some additional mess.
We started with a trial project that is a compulsory part of any
work. As thematic presentation of objects on the base of their attributes’
values was not provided in Easy Trace yet (V 7.7), we decided to
form five polygonal layers – roads, pavements, water, plants,
and others – plus two layers for buildings specified by the
customer.
This thematic division of the coverage promoted good data presentation
directly in course of digitalization. Errors of road net forming,
isolated paved areas, and a lot of other “delights”
were apparent at first sight. Another advantage consisted in acceleration
of attributive data input, as operators had to select only among
the attributes specified for this particular “areal”
layer. Artificially separated layers were united into a single coverage
of course before material handing-over to the customer. It took
not more than a minute and maybe ten clicks of mouse buttons.
But planning of the optimal layer set is only the above-water part
of the iceberg at trial project fulfillment. Ideology of the Easy
Trace package allows one to make clones of any project, i.e. ALL
features of the project-prototype will be inherited at further work.
Thus, we had to specify a lot of settings in the first project.
First of all, these are tracing strategies – named sets
of tracing tools’ parameters optimal for this particular source
material, resolution, and raster quality. Strategies are the basement
of custom tools. The last words sound darkly, but custom tools in
Easy Trace are simply buttons that allow quick selection of a tracing
tool, its strategy, and the layer of created vector objects. It
seems to be a trifle, but saves 10-15% of time.

It is also very important to prepare in advance topology verification
strategies, i.e. sets of layers to be checked and sets of verification
criteria to be applied to these layers. There may be a lot of verification
strategies in the project, but they are much quicker than tests
of polygonal coverage. So, it’s not reasonable to save time
at the expense of this operation.

The last thing to do is color specifying for raster and vector
layers. One must not neglect it – uniform settings help operators
from the QC group, and in addition fireworks-like colors of the
screen can drive you mad in a day. Muted gray-green tints are preferable
for raster layers, and contrast colors hinting at the corresponding
layers’ themes – for vector ones.
The trial project (or rather a couple of sheets processed after
it) allows one to determine operator job prices. The estimation
is simple - we divide time of work in number of objects for every
layer. It is convenient to use Easy Trace integrated statistic means
for the estimation.
After we have known the average time per object and the number
of objects on every layer, we can estimate the time of the entire
project digitalization. And the cost of one minute of operator’s
work is general knowledge. This is our usual approach, although
poor quality of rasters forces us sometimes to apply a step-up factor.
 |
The next step is assembling of the
whole raster coverage of the project. Simultaneously we prepare
its chart and specify projects. It is convenient to use an
Exel table as a chart. Different colors of its cells show
project status and the rate of fulfillment.
At last, we have a project (created
on the base of our carefully adjusted prototype) with full
raster coverage. A specialized Easy Trace utility cuts projects
out of it that will be distributed among operators for further
processing. |
The next turn is worthy of applauding. The customer unexpectedly
asked information on ALL buildings and constructions of the city.
These fragments of the future map were given to district police
officers and they FULFILLED ACTUALIZATION of data without a break
in their main job. This meant for us some additional feverish activity,
but what a beautiful approach!
As it was already mentioned above, we delivered material to the
customer in five fragments, starting with the most laden one, i.e.
city center. It would have been much easier for us to deliver it
as a whole of course – we wouldn’t have to coordinate
the rate of processing of different projects and their “buffer
zones”.
Some words about terminology by the way: we mark out five levels
of data division by the area. The first level (that is clear
without explanations) is the map sheet. The second level is
the project – several adjacent map sheets to be processed
by one operator. Next is the block – several united projects,
then the fragment (that we delivered to the customer), and then
the whole city. |
|

|
What is it for? First
of all, we try to avoid processing of map sheets one by one
as it is does not pay. Easy Trace is a resource-saving package
able to process several black-and-white sheets at once even
at Pentium 233 MHz, 64 Mb. (Actually, the operator never processes
one map sheet only, usually there are at the least nine of
them in the project – the central sheet that is being
vectorized and eight sheet fragments forming a kind of frame.) |
Gain in efficiency is caused by joining of map sheets just while
their processing, decrease of number of units to be accepted and
checked, acceleration of attributive data input, data verification
and correction.
Besides, the operator needn't reorganize the work so often at
processing of several map sheets as a whole. For example, it’s
rather difficult to start digitalization of the city industrial
zone after you have been tracing contours of garden-plots (that
are really numerous in our towns!) for a long time. What is more,
one begins understand the map better at processing of a big region,
and it is very useful considering extremely poor quality of source
rasters that require sometimes decoding rather than tracing.
Raster quality is a special item at large project fulfillment.
One often face with unwillingness to spend time for selection of
scanning parameters or with resolution decrease for the purpose
of data volume reduction (even now, when it is difficult to find
a disk less than 40 Gb!). If you have to process a map that is good
enough but scanned at 150 dpi resolution and full of thick mergedlines
(“just to make them clear!”) you may multiply working
time in two at the least...
Let us return to the question of data division by the area. The
next level is the block. It is assembled of several projects with
line joining at their boundaries and compulsory repeated verification
of the polygonal coverage. It is not reasonable to postpone verification
till the block grows up.

Unfortunately, the time required for polygonal coverage verification
increases nonlinearly depending on the number of vector objects
in the block. That’s why it is better to assemble several
blocks rather than a big one. It is also desirable to avoid long
and twisting boundaries at assembling of blocks and fragments.
| |
 |
At last, we unite several blocks
into a fragment that will be delivered to the customer. It
goes without saying that new verification of the polygonal
coverage will be fulfilled after merging of the blocks.
One should remember that once delivered, the
fragment becomes inaccessible for alternations. That’s
why it is necessary to “dub” its edges beforehand.
In other words, the “buffer zone” along its boundaries
should be also processed by the time of delivery.
|
Topology verification is a repeated operation that should be done
at every stage of data assembling. But there is another kind of
information – attributive data - that also needs a check-up.
This operation has some ruses too.
First of all, the package provides a special view mode to simplify
search of objects that have no links to the database. When in this
mode, such objects are glittering with yellow on the gray background,
and their nodes are highlighted. It’s simply impossible to
overlook them. The task is to input attributive data for these objects
and thus to quench them. It is convenient to use the Group Editor
for it, as this tool enables simultaneous input of attributive data
for a group of uniform objects.

Besides, there is a special utility in the package that shows
object attributes as inscriptions above the object. It remains only
to compare them with data in the raster. Applying the utility, we
used a “know-how” of course. If we have generated inscriptions
out of meanings of attributes’ codes they would have covered
the entire screen hiding everything. That’s why we used abbreviated
“pseudonyms” of attributive data values (prepared beforehand,
while the trial project processing).
As a matter of fact, that’s all about vectorizing of Karaganda.
Some notes below are rather of methodical character. Operators are
just people – it is better for them to see something once
than to here about many times. That’s why it is reasonable
to show the trial project to all of them – it solves a lot
of questions at once. Besides, it would not be out of place to charge
the best expert in vectorizing with preparing of a brief comics-like
manual explaining the most non-obvious situations. This illustrated
folder should be at the working place of every operator. Try –
it will be repaid.
P.S. The 7.8 version of the package provides new additional means
of vector and attributive data control. First of all, these are
transparent filling of polygons and thematic presentation of vector
data depending on attributive data values.
|