Even, you are opening a can of worms… epochs. I want to see what comes out of this ;P (if any)
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026, 23:07 Even Rouault via PROJ, <[email protected]> wrote: > Thinking more and looking at "ETRS89-NLD [AGRS2010] to ETRF2000 (1)", I > see it is a noop transformation, so with no time dependency... How does > that fit with the fact that ETRF2000 is dynamic. I see that "ETRS89-NLD > [AGRS2010]" uses DATUM["AGRS2010 (ETRF2000)") and has > ANCHOREPOCH[2010.5]. So I'm thinking the output coordinate when > applying "ETRS89-NLD [AGRS2010] to ETRF2000 (1)" is at coordinate epoch > 2010.5, right? Shouldn't the PROJ pipeline +proj=set +v_4=2010.5 ? > > Same question for ETRS89-FRA [RGF93 v2] to ETRF2000 (1) and ETRS89-FRA > [RGF93 v2b] to ETRF2000 (1) with are both no-ops. Shouln't output > coordinate epochs be respectively 2009 and 2019 per their anchor epoch ? > > -- > http://www.spatialys.com > My software is free, but my time generally not. > LLMs contribute to global warming and brain rot > > _______________________________________________ > PROJ mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj >
_______________________________________________ PROJ mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
