Add Lambert Conic Conformal (2SP Michigan) projection #1142
Conversation
| @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | |||
| .. option:: +scale=<value> | |||
|
|
|||
| Ellipsoid scale factor. Determines ellipsoid scale factor used in the projection. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As this is a very specific options to this projection method, I would keep it inline in lccm.rst
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, it makes sense, will change that.
I was also not sure about the name 'scale'. I think 'k_0' (and 'k' in the past) is generally used for scaling, but since this is a different kind of scaling I decided that it would be better to have a separate option than to reuse 'k_0' somehow ('k_0' can still be used in conjunction with 'scale' though).
| :align: center | ||
| :alt: Lambert Conformal Conic (2SP Michigan) | ||
|
|
||
| proj-string: ``+proj=lccm +lon_0=-90 +k=1.0000382`` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be scale and not k ?
(I was wondering if 'k' shouldn't be used instead of 'scale', but its meaning in LCC_2SP Michigan is very specific, so perhaps scale is fine)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch! As I said in the previous comment I tried 'k' first, but then switched to 'scale', but forgot to change the doc.
src/PJ_lccm.c
Outdated
| #include "proj_math.h" | ||
|
|
||
| PROJ_HEAD(lccm, "Lambert Conformal Conic (2SP Michigan)") | ||
| "\n\tConic, Sph&Ell\n\tlat_1= and lat_2= or lat_0"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps scale should be mentioned too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, should I just add it to the end? i.e. "lat_1= and lat_2= or lat_0, scale="?
|
Looks good to me! Would you mind squashing all the commits into a single one ? (I can also do it with the github UI but then the commit would appear as having you and me as authors) |
sphynx
force-pushed
the
proj-lcc-2sp-michigan
branch
from
08f0548
to
8acb481
Compare
sphynx
force-pushed
the
proj-lcc-2sp-michigan
branch
from
8acb481
to
8fc1197
Compare
Squashed and pushed with |
|
It also looks good to me. Thanks for putting up with our annoying requests. I think this has turned out to be a great PR giving us both better documentation, tests and understanding of the projection. Good job! |
Fixes #940