Short statement. 1.1.0 queries against 3031 need long/lat. Same kind against
2193 need lat/long (as per documentation).
Anything special about polar projections?
Long statement:
This is a working query against an EPSG:2193 layer:
url: http://maps.gns.cri.nz/geoserverlatest/gns/wfs
cql_filter: INTERSECTS(the_geom, POLYGON((5746568.950286176 1694143.7308257942,
5750237.927643864 1694143.730825794, 5750237.927643863 1690474.7534681011,
5746568.950286174 1690474.7534681007, 5746568.950286176 1694143.7308257942)))
maxFeatures: 1000
outputFormat: application/json
propertyName:
facies,lithology_,lithology1,Comments,Primary_so,Secondary_,Source_qua,the_geom
request: GetFeature
service: wfs
srsName: EPSG:2193
typeNames: NWP_Lithofacies_4_Ma__lWo_
version: 1.1.0
Not obvious unless you know the coordinate system, but the axis order for the
polygon is lat/long which seems correct for WFS version of 1.1.0.
Geometries returned are in long/lat order.
However, this is a working query against ESPG:3031
url: http://maps.gns.cri.nz/geoserverlatest/wfs
cql_filter: INTERSECTS(the_geom, POLYGON((438268.2059849124
-1301158.8151743845, 438268.2059849127 -1298360.2509553954, 435469.6417659225
-1298360.2509553959, 435469.6417659226 -1301158.8151743864, 438268.2059849124
-1301158.8151743845)))
maxFeatures: 1000
outputFormat: application/json
propertyName:
ABSMAX_MA,MAPSYMBOL,PLOTSYMBOL,NAME,DESCR,SIMPLENAME,MBREQUIV,FMNEQUIV,SBGRPEQUIV,GRPEQUIV,SPGRPEQUIV,TERREQUIV,STRATRANK,TYPENAME,TYPE_URI,GEOLHIST,REPAGE_URI,YNGAGE_URI,OLDAGE_URI,STRATAGE,ABSMIN_MA,LITHOLOGY,REPLITH_UR,REGLITH,REGLITH_UR,ROCKGROUP,ROCKCLASS,OBSMETHOD,CONFIDENCE,POSACC_M,SOURCE,SOURCECODE,METADATA,RESSCALE,CAPTSCALE,CAPTDATE,MODDATE,PLOTRANK,FEATUREID,SPEC_URI,SYMBOL,the_geom
request: GetFeature
service: wfs
srsName: EPSG:3031
typeNames: gns:ATA_geological00_units_West
version: 1.1.0
The polygon coordinates are in long/lat , not lat/long! Furthermore, if you
change version 1.0.0 it still works whereas the 2193 query above does not.
Returned geometries are in long/lat as above.
Both layers are on the same 2.11.0 geoserver.
Can anyone shed any light on what is going on? It certainly make client-side
code challenging.
Notice: This email and any attachments are confidential and may not be used,
published or redistributed without the prior written consent of the Institute
of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited (GNS Science). If received in error
please destroy and immediately notify GNS Science. Do not copy or disclose the
contents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-users mailing list
Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton:
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines:
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html
If you want to request a feature or an improvement, also see this:
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Successfully-requesting-and-integrating-new-features-and-improvements-in-GeoServer
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
