<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’m happy with removing CRS altogether, and forcing “lon/lat relative to an ellipsoidal CRS based on the WGS84 datum”. That matches most usage that I’m aware of (and KML).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’d be wary of adding EPSG:3857 because it is the thin end of a very fat wedge.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Tim, I think the situation that we have at the moment is better than you describe, but not by much. We have “allow any CRS and axis order will always be lon/lat or easting/northing”. We did that to avoid the burden of carrying around axis order knowledge. But it still has the burden on needing to know what EPSG:27700, or whatever, means. Web clients still have to get the WKT, Proj.4 string, etc, from that id (assuming that they can work with the result). So we dodged one bullet, but not the other, arguably more complex, one.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Here’s a pull request of mine:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="https://github.com/GeoJSONWG/draft-geojson/pull/3">https://github.com/GeoJSONWG/draft-geojson/pull/3</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Martin<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> geojson-bounces@lists.geojson.org [mailto:geojson-bounces@lists.geojson.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Tim Schaub<br><b>Sent:</b> 15 May 2013 05:41<br><b>To:</b> geojson@lists.geojson.org<br><b>Subject:</b> [GeoJSON] Removing CRS from GeoJSON<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>So as to avoid hijacking Sean's thread, I'll start a new one here.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I'm in favor of restricting the allowed coordinate reference systems for GeoJSON objects to 1: <span style='color:black'>latitude, longitude coordinates relative to an ellispoidal CRS based on the WGS84 datum.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>I think the second best alternative would be to restrict to 2 CRS: CRS84 or EPGS:3857.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>I don't like the "allow any CRS and let axis order follow the CRS" because I think it either reduces interoperability or imposes an unreasonable burden on web clients (I don't know of a good web service - or really want to depend on one - that provides axis order information for arbitrary CRS URN, and the table is too big to ask every client to carry around).</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>I apologize for having missed earlier "discussion" [1]. I haven't dug down to that epoch in my inbox yet.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>And I'm in favor of the proposed RFC to IETF [2].</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><a href="https://github.com/GeoJSONWG/draft-geojson/pull/2">https://github.com/GeoJSONWG/draft-geojson/pull/2</a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>[1] <a href="http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/2013-April/000712.html">http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/2013-April/000712.html</a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>[2] <a href="http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/2013-April/000713.html">http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/2013-April/000713.html</a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Tim</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>PS - Do the build artifacts (xml, txt, etc) need to be in the repo? If so, can someone update the README.md with detail on building them?</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>PPS - Mildly curious what it means to be "commented out" as an author. I do see a comment that suggests authors should be asked if they are willing to be authors. Happy to entertain that question.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>-- <br>Tim Schaub<br>OpenGeo <a href="http://opengeo.org/" target="_blank">http://opengeo.org/</a><br>Expert service straight from the developers.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></body></html>