Is it physically possible to have a non-zero `latitude_of_projection_origin`
and still actually be “geostationary”?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
# Title
Add unit_conversion_factor for units in coordinate axis to convert to meters
# Moderator
Any takers?
# Moderator Status Review [last updated: YY/MM/DD]
???
# Requirement Summary
Currently, in the WKT form, you can specify the conversion factor to meters
along with the name of the units
# Title
Add direction attribute for coordinate axis
# Moderator
(Any takers?)
# Moderator Status Review [last updated: YY/MM/DD]
???
# Requirement Summary
Add a direction for the coordinate system axis attributes to specify which
direction the coordinate goes in. This is useful when building a
I am removing the part about the standalone WKT to be discussed in another
issue.
Proposed WKT string statement modifications (modifications in italics):
>There will be occasions when a given CRS property value is duplicated in both
>a single-property grid mapping attribute and the crs_wkt
> This would be a non-trivial piece of work but until it is done I don't think
> we can really know what we are missing in the CF attributes what WKT can
> describe and needs to be included in use cases of CF datasets.
@JonathanGregory, this is currently supported in `pyproj` master:
Forward from: https://github.com/OSGeo/PROJ/issues/1930
Currently the
[geostationary_projection](http://cfconventions.org/cf-conventions/cf-conventions#_geostationary_projection)
has the latitude_of_projection_origin defined without any defaults provided.
Based on the issue above in PROJ, the
Merged #245 into master.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/pull/245#event-3036605425
This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is distinct from
painter1 approved this pull request.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/pull/245#pullrequestreview-358566074
This list forwards relevant notifications from
Just a note concerning the pending merge of the PR corresponding to this issue
- it is also attached to #231, which seems uncontroversial and has not
generated any discussion.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@jessicaaustin @mwengren @ngalbraith @roy-lowry many thanks for all your
comments and responses to my questions. This discussion has helped me to
understand much better the ways in which quality information is gathered and
used.
Regarding the 'non aggregate' names, I think we are all agreed
Hello @painter1 @davidhassell
I think that this PR is editorial only. It simply updates the version string to
1.9 (draft), to ensure that the nightly build of latest is not version stamped
as 1.8, now that the 1.8 tag is minted and published.
I hope this is a useful and timely step
thank you
11 matches
Mail list logo
