Talk:Data model (GIS)

inconsistency
The introduction mentions 3 ways, Vector, Raster and TIN. But the rest of the article only discuss the first two. Should the third one get at least a section header as a place holder? Kowloonese (talk) 23:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge from Data model (ArcGIS)
This stub of dubious notability may be better of being merged here. Thoughts? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:32, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 13:27, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Page expansion
There was not much content here, so I added quite a bit; I think it is up to a basic (B/C) level now, but it could use more enhancements: Feel free to improve it further! Bplewe (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Rationalize with GIS file formats. There is probably a rationale for keeping the theoretical models page separate from the file formats page, but there is too much overlap and they can be integrated better.
 * More extensions? Uncertainty, multiscale GIS, multimedia, etc. What is fully integrated into GIS, not experimental/theoretical?
 * More figures, such as an ER or URL diagram in the modeling section.
 * A lot of the pages that currently link to Vector graphics or Raster graphics could link here.
 * Q: Should the Vector and Raster models have their own GIS-specific pages, separate from Vector graphics or Raster graphics?