SRS is fine too. Michael Barton School of Human Evolution &Social Change Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity Arizona State University
...Sent from my iPad > On Jun 1, 2018, at 6:28 PM, Nikos Alexandris <[email protected]> wrote: > > * Michael Barton <[email protected]> [2018-06-01 22:51:14 +0000]: > >> As one of the most venerable desktop GIS packages and perhaps THE most >> venerable still in existence, GRASS has some quirks that harken back to its >> origins long ago. Most are simply quirky. But the folder hierarchy called a >> “location” is very confusing in today’s GIS world. Originally, it did >> primarily refer to maps referencing a geographic location in the world. >> Although that meaning still exists in the ‘default region’, GRASS locations >> primarily refer to a coordinate reference system (CRS). In fact, while the >> CRS of a location cannot be changed (unless you manually alter some of the >> files in the directory, at the risk of making maps unuseable), the default >> region can be. So a location now refers to a fixed CRS and a changeable >> geographic extent. >> >> Use of the anachronistic term “location” to refer to a CRS is a quirk that >> makes GRASS more confusing to initial users. I suggest we consider beginning >> to migrate the term “location” to “CRS”. The term “location” does not occur >> in a large number of module interfaces: those (like g.mapset) for changing >> to a new working directory on the fly, vector and raster reprojection >> modules, and maybe a couple of others. It occurs in the GUI at startup, in >> the location wizard of course, and in some tools for georeferencing. >> >> We could initially maintain backward compatibility and increase >> understandability by simply referring to “location” as something like >> “location/CRS” where ever it shows up in the GUI, but leave module arguments >> alone. A next step would be to have modules that require “location=” as an >> argument accept either “location=” or “CRS=”. And maybe that is enough. We >> could keep “location” where it currently occurs in existing command modules >> and scripts as a legacy option. Likewise, we could keep it in current code, >> only changing during code rewrites. Any new modules that need to refer to >> this file hierarchy would use “CRS”. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Michael > > Dear Michael, > > I almost always name Locations after their spatial reference system. > > +1 for this idea. > > Would think of SRS instead of CRS, so as to be in line with GDAL's > terminology? > > Nikos _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
