Andrea Aime wrote: > Ben Caradoc-Davies ha scritto: >> In 2D+1, is the main difference that the third dimension ignored by some >> operations, such as coordinate transforms? I suspect 2D+1 will be OK for >> line-strings, except when you try to change datum. > > Indeed. However there is no guarantee that the third dimension is > going to be a Z. What if it's an M? (measured shapefiles?)
Not to mention XYZM, where Z could be depth, or could be two-way-time, and M is a measure (e.g. seismic sample index). Do you plan to support 2D+2? I think that if borehole line-strings are stored as XY + ellipsoid Z, 2D+1 should be just fine. If only we could get users to agree on the One True CRS. Perhaps we can get Google to impose their bizarre ellipsoid on the world. ;-) -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <[email protected]> Software Engineer, CSIRO Exploration and Mining Australian Resources Research Centre 26 Dick Perry Ave, Kensington WA 6151, Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
