[Geojson] GeoJSON '1.0'?
tschaub at openplans.org
Wed Mar 12 23:07:58 PDT 2008
Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> 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
Ok, I think we have all agreed that the order of our coordinates array
is x, y [, z[, whatever]].
Given that (please stop me here if that is not something we all agree
on), do we really think we can either
1) allow things like
while disallowing the same structure with "code": 4326, or
2) forbid the EPSG codes from being used at all?
I think both are a bit foolish to believe.
I know that there are plenty of people who object to x, y ordering
paired with a reference to EPSG:4326. Has anyone spoken to any of these
people and been given the impression that having a "coordinate_order"
array makes them happy?
> 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.
More information about the GeoJSON