You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
With version 1, I could take an E/N, convert to Lat/Lng and plot on a Bing OS map with almost perfect accuarcy.
I have just moved to version 2 and points plotted appear to be 10-20m out. I'm plotting 1km grid squares which should line up perfectly with the blue OS grid lines (and did in version 1).
I.e.
Version 1.1.2
$var_grid_ref_osref = new OSRef($var_easting, $var_northing);
$var_grid_ref_lat_lng = $var_grid_ref_osref->toLatLng();
$var_grid_ref_lat_lng->OSGB36ToWGS84();
If I plot the points in ArcMap (without the toWGS84 conversion) they are perfect. So the issue seems to be with the toWGS84 function. To confirm this, I've checked and both version 1 and 2 return the same lat/lng values for this example if you take off the WGS84 conversion (52.06146,-3.13788). But after the OSGB36ToWGS84() in 1.2.1 or toWGS84() in 2.0.1 conversions I get different answers.
Is this an issue or am i doing something wrong?
Thanks
Steve
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
With version 1, I could take an E/N, convert to Lat/Lng and plot on a Bing OS map with almost perfect accuarcy.
I have just moved to version 2 and points plotted appear to be 10-20m out. I'm plotting 1km grid squares which should line up perfectly with the blue OS grid lines (and did in version 1).
I.e.
Version 1.1.2
"easting": 322000, "northing": 241000, "lat": 52.06187, "lng": -3.13916
![version1](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/16681762/12579009/795adcc8-c41c-11e5-959b-8411f4675643.jpg)
Version 2.0.1
"easting": 322000, "northing": 241000, "lat": 52.06193, "lng": -3.13935
![version2](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/16681762/12579012/7d62a65c-c41c-11e5-93d6-b8308ebbf9f6.jpg)
If I plot the points in ArcMap (without the toWGS84 conversion) they are perfect. So the issue seems to be with the toWGS84 function. To confirm this, I've checked and both version 1 and 2 return the same lat/lng values for this example if you take off the WGS84 conversion (52.06146,-3.13788). But after the OSGB36ToWGS84() in 1.2.1 or toWGS84() in 2.0.1 conversions I get different answers.
Is this an issue or am i doing something wrong?
Thanks
Steve
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: