- From: Raj Singh <rsingh@opengeospatial.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:43:11 -0400
- To: Jens de Smit <jens@layar.com>
- Cc: Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at>, public-poiwg@w3c.org
But maybe if you are describing an object using 3D coordinate data, you probably have enough data in there that: <gml:Point srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG:6.6:4979" srsDimension="3"> doesn't seem too verbose compared to the tens or hundreds of 3D points you are listing? In GML you can specify the CRS once in a parent element, so the 3D POI would look something like: <location srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG:6.6:4979" srsDimension="3"> <point-n>y.yyyyyyy xx.xxxxxxx zz.z</point-n> <point-n>y.yyyyyyy xx.xxxxxxx zz.z</point-n> <point-n>y.yyyyyyy xx.xxxxxxx zz.z</point-n> <point-n>y.yyyyyyy xx.xxxxxxx zz.z</point-n> <point-n>y.yyyyyyy xx.xxxxxxx zz.z</point-n> ... </location> --- Raj The OGC: Making location count... http://www.opengeospatial.org/contact On Jun 28, at 6:12 AM, Jens de Smit wrote: > The one thing I don't like about GML is, that as soon as you want to > do 3-dimensional points, you have to explicitly specify <gml:Point > srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG:6.6:4979" srsDimension="3"> which is > very verbose. RFC5870 makes this easier, but otherwise I'm not yet > convinced that RFC5870 is superior to the GML profile. But, since you > have spent a lot more time on this, perhaps you could make us see > otherwise?
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 12:43:56 UTC