Hi Even,
Thank you for this great response. I'll try out some of those things you
mention on the CRS of the DEM and correcting for the geoid; I had also been
reading that any height values used in this process need to be heights above
the ellipsoid.
I had seen good outputs from
Hi,
I haven't done myself that exercice but I know that computing RPC values
that are stable enough might be challenging, so perhaps the issue is
related to that
A few other remarks:
- your gdalwarp command line refers to RPC_DEM_SRS and
RPC_DEM_MISSING_VALUE but doesn't include a
Hello,
I am attempting to implement georegistration through RPC. I have the following
information I've used to calibrate the RPC coefficients, using all terms for
numerator and denominator for both sample and line equations.
*
image grid, stored in tiff format with no geo-information
My personal take:
I slightly Hungarian notation and it seems to me like needing that extra
notation points to other coding style issues. However, I think moving away
from it would be a chaotic mess for GDAL. It would be a massive change to
switch it all. Consistency is critical.
On Wed, Apr 17,
Hi,
This is described in https://gdal.org/development/rfc/rfc8_devguide.html
. I've submitted https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/9689 so it is going
to be linked to
https://gdal.org/development/dev_practices.html#making-changes-to-gdal
I'd probably agree that at my beginnings in GDAL, I
Hi Andrew,
I think GDAL uses a mix of styles, but if you dislike Hungarian notation, it's
still important to distinguish between "systems" (e.g. dwBytes) and "apps"
(e.g. cchWideChar) notation.
The first one just repeats the variable type, which is mostly redundant, but
the second actually
Hi,
I was going to make some changes to some GDAL code and I generally want to
follow along. I see that most of the code is still using Hungarian notation
for identifier names. I haven't seen this anywhere else in like 20 years.
Is it OK to submit code without this naming convention or do we
