GIScience 2016 Short Paper Proceedings A Function-based model of Place E. Papadakis 1* , B. Resch 1 , T. Blaschke 1 Dept. of Geoinformatics – Z_GIS, University of Salzburg, Schillerstr. 30, 5020 Salzburg, Austria Email: {emmanouil.papadakis; bernd.resch; thomas.blaschke}@sbg.ac.at Abstract People assign context to space by defining places. Formalizing place enables digital systems to provide a human-centred representation of the geographical world. In this paper we propose a multi-dimensional definition of place including spatial properties, composition and functionality. These dimensions define place as a set of functions, which entail a spatial structure expressed in patterns of spatial descriptions. Relying on this model, it is possible to define places as space infused with functional context by converting geometries to interrelated components that support certain functions. 1. Introduction There is a long standing conflict between the representation of the geographical world, as it is depicted in the digital and the human world. On the one hand, digital systems understand and analyse space, whereas on the other hand, people perceive and refer to places. Attempting to reconcile these disparate views requires methods that represent the vague and individual- driven concept of place in the rigid and strict formulations of space, and vice versa. There have been attempts to soften these sharp differences guided by Tuan’s definition of place as “space infused with human meaning” (Tuan 1977). There are two general directions in defining the notion of place, either by infusing spatial representations with semantics or by projecting semantics on space. A leading approach of augmenting space with semantics is the objectification of space (Smith and Mark 2003). According to this, spatial structures are converted into sophisticated objects with ascribed properties, attributing a context to them. In the opposite way, digital gazetteers (Goodchild 2011) offer a linkage between place names and semantics to spatiotemporal footprints. Finally, the affordance-based model of place (Jordan et al. 1998) focuses on annotating space with context derived from people’s actions. Particularly, space, expressed as a set of affordances, is imbued with meaning expressing the ability to serve human intentionality on achieving a final goal. Most of the aforementioned methods do not fully utilize the expressive power of place. The first two methods associate space with semantics, although it does not always define a human context. On the other hand, the affordance-based model approximates a context; however, affordances provide limited and individual-driven knowledge, defining whether space affords a final goal, which impedes the model’s operationalization. We propose an alternative approach of defining place, adopting the concept of functions and considering that place is space that supports certain functionality. In this way, operationalization is achievable because functions provide an understanding of how and why places operate given a set of properties, avoiding questions of spatial perception. To illustrate this, consider the following example. Suppose we have access to an urban map either without annotations or ones that are incomprehensible due to language barriers. Would it be possible to define the potential location of a shopping centre, using exclusively lines and polygons? Answering this would require to interrelate the spatial organization of places with their functionality.