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

CRS support in GeoJSON #6

Open
andrea-perego opened this issue May 5, 2018 · 5 comments
Open

CRS support in GeoJSON #6

andrea-perego opened this issue May 5, 2018 · 5 comments
Labels
release:3.0.0 Actively being worked on for GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 status:fixed Resolution applied in draft type:editorial Minor issues regarding specification structure, etc. webinar:2024-05-14 To be discussed in the 2024-05-14 webinar

Comments

@andrea-perego
Copy link
Collaborator

At the time of the release of GeoDCAT-AP v1.0 (December 2015), GeoJSON provided support to arbitrary coordinate reference systems (see the original specification).

In the new specification (RFC 7946), standardised in the framework of IETF, this is no longer the case, and the only supported coordinate reference system is CRS84 (i.e., WGS84 lon/lat) - see RFC 7946, Section 4.

Because of this, the use of GeoJSON in GeoDCAT-AP might need to be reconsidered - at least by including a caveat, and some guidance on when and how to use it.

@nmtoken
Copy link

nmtoken commented Oct 29, 2020

systems (see the original specification).

It wasn't a specification at the time, only a proposal. RFC 7946 is the only specification, not a new specification.

@jakubklimek
Copy link

Both in the GeoJSON RFC 7946 and in the GeoSPARQL 1.1 spec on the geoJSON literal the fact that CRS specification is not supported in geoJSON is clearly stated. Also, in my opinion, this fact has become well-known in the community over the years.

Since the gsp:geoJSONLiteral from GeoSPARQL 1.1 has been adopted already in GeoDCAT-AP 2.0.0, I would say that if a user wants to specify a CRS, they simply need to choose another geometry serialization like WKT or GML. I would therefore not include any additional means of specifying a CRS for geoJSON in GeoDCAT-AP 2.0.0.

I propose to resolve this issue either by

  1. closing it with no action
  2. adding a simple note saying "Note that geoJSON literals do not support specification of the CRS used. [GeoSPARQL11]".

@andrea-perego what is your preference?

@jakubklimek jakubklimek added the release:3.0.0 Actively being worked on for GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 label Feb 9, 2024
@nmtoken
Copy link

nmtoken commented Feb 9, 2024

Perhaps OGC Features and Geometries JSON could be suggested assuming it becomes an adopted standard

@jakubklimek
Copy link

@nmtoken Thank you for pointing out this initiative. Indeed, that could be also suggested, but in that case, we would also need to provide guidance on how to represent a FG-JSON literal in RDF, basically repeating what is described in #4 for GeoJSON before its adoption in GeoSPARQL - I would like to avoid that.
A related discussion is actually currently being held in opengeospatial/ogc-geosparql#249.

Until that disucssion is resolved, and a resolution included in a furture GeoSPARQL release, all we can do in GeoDCAT-AP is to point to that discussion in the note.

@jakubklimek jakubklimek added the type:editorial Minor issues regarding specification structure, etc. label Feb 12, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar status:resolution-proposed Resolution proposed and will be accepted before the next webinar webinar:2024-05-14 To be discussed in the 2024-05-14 webinar and removed webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar labels Mar 8, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added next-webinar To be discussed in the next webinar status:resolution-provided Resolution statement present, not yet applied in draft webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar and removed next-webinar To be discussed in the next webinar webinar:2024-05-14 To be discussed in the 2024-05-14 webinar labels Apr 25, 2024
@jakubklimek
Copy link

Resolution: No need to explicitly mention the lack of support for CRS in GeoJSON.

@jakubklimek jakubklimek added status:fixed Resolution applied in draft and removed status:resolution-provided Resolution statement present, not yet applied in draft status:resolution-proposed Resolution proposed and will be accepted before the next webinar labels Apr 25, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added webinar:2024-05-14 To be discussed in the 2024-05-14 webinar status:resolution-proposed Resolution proposed and will be accepted before the next webinar status:fixed Resolution applied in draft and removed webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar status:fixed Resolution applied in draft status:resolution-proposed Resolution proposed and will be accepted before the next webinar labels May 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release:3.0.0 Actively being worked on for GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 status:fixed Resolution applied in draft type:editorial Minor issues regarding specification structure, etc. webinar:2024-05-14 To be discussed in the 2024-05-14 webinar
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants