> Od: [email protected] > > >Ah, I misunderstood then... Just looked on the information provided at >http://www.epsg-registry.org/ - clicking on "retrieve by code", entering "9819" >in the field, clicking on "Retrieve", clicking on "view" on the retrieved line, >and finally clicking on "Example". The values provided there match what you >said. >
Thanks for the link - its useful. >I need to think more about that. Maybe after a night of sleep... > >> To comply with ESRI it might be good to be able to use also other set of >> definitions together with EPSG - like PROJ4 is having epsg, esri and >> esri.extra definition files. > >Yes absolutly. If the definitions are provided as WKT, we can already do that >in >GeoTools 2 (but the process needs better documentation). Are the definitions in >WKT or in an other form? > In PROJ they are in PROJ format (like +proj=krovak etc..) but IMHO it would be perfect to have it in WKT. Jan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
