Add RFC 81: support for coordinate epochs in geospatial formats #3827
Conversation
|
|
||
| See https://github.com/rouault/gdal/blob/coordinate_epoch/gdal/doc/source/user/coordinate_epoch.rst | ||
| for impacts on the API, encoding of CRS in a number of formats, and impacts on | ||
| existing utilities. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rouault can we merge that doc with this one? Otherwise it is not completely clear what document we are reviewing and what is being approved. If we have a single document, we can focus on one text, not two, and don't have to consider relationships between them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we merge that doc with this one? Otherwise it is not completely clear what document we are reviewing and what is being approved. If we have a single document, we can focus on one text, not two, and don't have to consider relationships between them.
I see your point but the other document is intended to be in the user documentation on gdal.org once PR 3810 is merged, and potentially be evolving over time. I don't want to go through the RFC process each time we change something for a format.
|
The implementation on the GeoPackage side will likely change a bit as the spec editor has proposed an official way of encoding the coordinate epoch: opengeospatial/geopackage#600 |
|
Topic raised to Spatialite in https://groups.google.com/g/spatialite-users/c/NtbuBpRzYBE/m/R0-QzgeXAwAJ |
|
The GDAL project highly values your contribution and would love to see this work merged! Unfortunately this PR has not had any activity in the last 21 days and is being automatically marked as "stale". If you think this pull request should be merged, please check - that all unit tests are passing - that all comments by reviewers have been addressed - that there is enough information for reviewers, in particular
|
|
keep alive |
No description provided.