In several of the projects that I have participated, I have witnessed that the confusions caused by the LADM are not necessarily associated with understanding it as an ISO norm, but rather in isolating its conceptual scope from its technological mechanization scenario. In other words, on how to implement it.
It must be clear that the LADM is not a conventional ISO standard, as would be a norm for metadata management (ISO-19115), to give an example, or a norm for observations and measurements (ISO-19156). They are equal in the sense that they are applied to a specialized discipline, neither of these two standards can be understood by a non-geomatic user dedicated to the good reading of related domains and geofumed research; as much as he knows how to make shapefiles or radiate with a total station; Training is always necessary to know how to implement an ISO standard.
The issue that an ISO standard requires the mastery of a specialty (business) is what makes the standard . Known as LADM is much more difficult to implement; Because land administration is a matter in which broad specialized disciplines intervene, a career that to date in few universities is served just that dimension.
Knowing the LADM is much more than understanding how UML packages, classes and subclasses work; it is necessary to know the context of administration of real rights; both from the Registry side and from Cadastre and cartography, private law, public law, legal and administrative levies. Rather than learning how to convert a registration seat into RRR, the LADM takes an effort as simplistic as possible, to standardize what already happens in real life, the terms they acquire according to the context and national legislation, that RRR is only the result of a will of the parties that a notary interpreted, which protocolized poetically in a deed, to which he accompanied the information that he understood from a cadastral certificate, which in turn is an interpretation that the surveyor once made of the physical reality, and, after a hard work of interpretation and mental reminder of requirements a qualifier ordered to be transcribed by a scribe, to finally get to the recorder that should try again to interpret, what the scribe wrote, who interpreted the qualifier, interpreted by the notary, who interpreted the will of the parties, to sign in an order of registration or denial ... there if any of all these were wrong in their interpretation!
Modeling is one of the challenges that the Geofumadados of Beyond Cadastro 2014 said in there for 1994, that today would be very normal. They were sincerely right, and although modeling is an act of pure common sense, they forgot that this is the least common sense in human beings. Modeling involves a negotiation exercise among business professionals: Notary, surveyor, geomatics, surveyor, registrar, who must learn a basic UML; and computer users who must download to understand the real life of what they are trying to automate.
Understanding land management involves knowing about registry principles that have a universal focus, at least in a large part of the Western world:
The Principle of Praying, which prevents a restriction or liability type lien from being automatically incorporated, unless the legislation allows it, the consent principle that establishes that legislation approved by a national congress or a responsible authority can materialize it as an alert or a preventive annotation, the advertising principle that indicates that any user of a good must know that a mining concession or a special regime area affects its domain, use or occupation, the specialty principle that separates the registration competences with cadastre, the principle of registration inscription that implies that a territorial object requires passing through a flow in order to have legal competence ... and so on until converting a legal entity into a system of rules that make it easier for the LADM to stop being a poem with an action plan that is difficult to define whether you have a logical UML profile or a database physical cough; Taking it to a system of policies, rules, processes and procedures requires more than being a poet.
After my presentation at the Instituto Agustín Codazzi within the framework of the ICDE and my presentation this week in a Central American country, I will be able to follow up on the subject. For now, a few black and white answers:
Implementing LADM changes the way we register?
Implement it No. Understand it in part. Mechanize it, definitely yes.
Is it necessary for users of substantive area (business) to know the LADM?
Understand it yes. How to implement it ... not necessarily.
Can a new system be developed without adopting LADM?
Is there a need to change legislation or institutional framework to implement the LADM?
Did LADM really have to become an ISO?
After seeing such disparate tools, the difficulties of integrating registry with cadastre and the high costs of interoperability, should definitely have existed long ago. The LADM helps sustain the business, which never changes, although the tool must be reconditioned every 10 years.
What are the steps to understanding LADM?
Read Beyond Cadastre 2014, understand the cadastral procedure, understand the notarial procedure, understand the registration procedure, understand the legislation of the special regime, interpret the ISO-19152 on this basis, learn about lived, bad and good experiences before continuing reading ...
What are the steps to adapt a LADM profile?
Take a generic profile, separate it into four quadrants, lay people out of the legal area to build the BA_Unit classes, lay people in the cadastre to build the spatial and topographical classes, sit down with them to build private law relations, address a public law legislation and build a file and a procedure, address other legislations gradually, simplify the source.
What are the steps to implement the LADM in a new system?
Approve a generic logical profile, the simpler the better. Build a physical profile, apply a tool for transactional management and versioning, adapt processes, develop or adapt the tool with a methodology that preserves the life cycle ... if it is preferable to change the order depending on the country's protocol context.
Where can you see examples of LADM implementation in the Hispanic context?
If you want to see a primitive exercise with the CCDM before it was called the ISO-19152 standard, it is worth seeing SINAP in Honduras. Not only the technological tool Unified System of Records SURE, but the legislation that gave life to the law of property and law of territorial order. In the medium term it is worthwhile to see the evolution of SURE, which is a process underway under a public-private partnership, possibly with Bolckchain.
If you want to see a municipal tool that complies with the LADM, you can see SIGIT in the commonwealth of Puerto Cortés, Omoa Puerto Barrios between Guatemala and Honduras, with a web client tool on OpenLayers, a decoupling cadastral layer and even a property registry with a focus on associated center of the national entity. Although it has cost that it is implemented as it should be, the model is of a geofumated quantity, which may be tempting near fruits in a context of El Salvador.
If you want to see a tool for municipal land registry maintenance with GML / WFS services with a national system, you can see the Municipal SIT in the Association of Municipalities of Honduras, developed on client-level QGIS, plus other herbs for interoperability up to BentleyMap V8i without I-model.
If you want to see a process in implementation, very promising, almost as God commands, see the current experience of the Institute Agustín Codazzi and the Superintendency of Registry and Notary, Colombia-style platanized. Using INTERLIS to streamline the implementation, a good challenge of opensource and ESRI coexisting and an IDE that acts as a node of Land Administration.
If you want to see a promising exercise that will take some time but will finally be achieved with a tropicalized methodology, I suggest following the development of SIICAR2 in Nicaragua.
And if you have doubts ... there is my mail.