[Geojson] GeoJSON '1.0'?

Christopher Schmidt crschmidt at metacarta.com
Wed Mar 12 22:36:32 PDT 2008


On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:25:59AM -0400, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:20:04PM -0600, Tim Schaub wrote:
> > For clarification:
> > 
> > I'm responding the the current draft (which uses EPSG:4326) and saying 
> > that I don't think coordinate_order is needed.
> > 
> > The simple question is whether this should be a valid representation of 
> > a point in the northern hemisphere:
> >  ...
> > I think it should.
> 
> I think it is not a valid representation of a point in the northern
> hemisphere.

To clarify:

It is my understanding that using the "EPSG:4326" forces the assumption
that the ordering is y, x. This understanding is based on feedback from
conversations at FOSS4G2007, the most memorable of which was with Raj
(from OGC), who essentially told me (as far as I remember) "You can't do
that."

I have no idea what "You can't do that" means. The letters EPSG mean
nothing special to me, and to claim that they do seems weird to me. 

Given that, I have no particular opinion of my own basd on my own
knowledge. However, it appears to be a not-uncommon opinion that using
the EPSG code in this way would be 'bad form'. 

Or maybe I really just misunderstood, and this should have all been
resolved 6 months ago.

I don't know enough to have any personal prference: my understanding is
based entirely on what I have been told, and there is no significant
support for what I have been told that I am able to point to.

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta


More information about the Geojson mailing list