Re: [dxwg] Use Case: Negotiation by Coordinate Reference System


> The choice of CRS does not change the meaning or structure of this, only the actual numbers. So it is very similar to encoding/serialization or lang. 

Strongly agree here.  What is missing from CRS (IMHO) is scale, which is equally important in interpreting/using the information in the message.  Which brings up the binding together of scale and CRS in the TCRS concept of MapML. 

MapML takes the approach of defining its own domain of values for "projection"/ TCRS.  The register of values and their definition is in the specification, so its self-contained / descriptive.

With language, there exists an accepted standard for the domain of values, which is not the case for CRS.

I've never seen someone inventing their own language code, but I'm pretty sure this is a regular occurrence for CRS.

GitHub Notification of comment by prushforth
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2018 13:11:49 UTC