Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Some improvements to the docs for tmerc and omerc #1281

merged 8 commits into from Feb 24, 2019


None yet
3 participants
Copy link

busstoptaktik commented Feb 22, 2019

Over at #523, @ralphtee gave some very nice explanations for omerc. I have added some of this material + a some descriptional text to the docs for omerc.

Additionally clarified a few things about algorithms in the docs for tmerc.

@busstoptaktik busstoptaktik requested a review from kbevers Feb 22, 2019

Copy link

kbevers left a comment

Overall this is very good. I would suggest only keeping the first paragraph ("The Oblique Mercator projection is a cylindrical map projection that closes the
gap between the Mercator and the Transverse Mercator projections") above the classification table and moving the rest of the intro-text below the table. This conforms to the style that is used in most other properly documented projection as well as giving a quick overview of the table without scrolling down the page.

There's some good figures in #523. I don't know the source of the figures but if we are allowed to include them (or reproductions of them) I think they would help illustrate some of the points made about he different types of rotations that can be applied. It's probably a job for another day but at least it is worth considering this as a future improvement.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

kbevers commented Feb 22, 2019

The updates to omerc and tmerc are not related, right? In that case they would be better placed in separate commits instead of the same.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

busstoptaktik commented Feb 22, 2019

The updates to omerc and tmerc are not related, right?

Not as related as I expected when starting the work: While omerc clearly being mostly in need of a touch up, I thought of it as an occasion for a general overhaul of omerc, tmerc, and merc, giving an overall better feeling that they are in close family, although looking much different.

I think I got part of that message through in the intro to omerc, but I ran short of time before getting through everything.

So, yes, it was the idea to make changes logically tied across all 3 projections, but that is probably not terribly evident from this PR.

author = {Mikael Rittri},
title = {New omerc approximations of Denmark System 34},
year = {2012},
url = {}

This comment has been minimized.


rouault Feb 22, 2019


can you change this to , since is probably going to be retired at some point

This comment has been minimized.


busstoptaktik Feb 22, 2019

Author Member

Thanks for noticing this - I had planned to change it, but forgot about it

busstoptaktik and others added some commits Feb 22, 2019

Add a blank line above "..note::"
It won't render correctly otherwise.

@kbevers kbevers merged commit 38a1525 into OSGeo:master Feb 24, 2019

1 check was pending

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr Waiting for AppVeyor build to complete

kbevers added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 24, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.