So now I tried the import with EPSG 5653 and this one seems to work.
I am working now with geodata for around 15 years, but the CAD scene
never runs out of new obstacles for me.
What the f is EPSG 5653, and most importantly: Why is it it even being used?
(Fun fact: once a CAD guy told me, after me complaining about his data
having just some local cartesian coordinates and no official CRS, that
his software would run much slower, the higher the coordinate numbers
were, so working with short local coordinates was his way to be able to
work at all.
Now these other guys just add another 2 digits? Obviously trying to
evade work!)
Did I already mention that I very much dislike CAD and its seemlingly
not existing philosophy behind it.
Thanks for the hints!
Bernd
Am 03.06.25 um 17:10 schrieb Jürgen E. Fischer via QGIS-User:
Moin Bernd,
On Tue, 03. Jun 2025 at 16:25:54 +0200, Bernd Vogelgesang via QGIS-User wrote:
Actually, the data should be in EPSG 25833, but somehow they managed to
scramble the x-values by adding 33 before the otherwise correct coordinates.
So EPSG:5650?
Jürgen
_______________________________________________
QGIS-User mailing list
[email protected]
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
--
Dipl.-Geogr.
Bernd Vogelgesang
Kappel 17
91355 Hiltpoltstein
Tel: 09192-3499427
mobil: 0163-1860160
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
QGIS-User mailing list
[email protected]
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
