On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Moritz Lennert
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be wrote:
On 09/09/12 16:34, Markus Metz wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Moritz Lennert
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be wrote:
On 07/09/12 09:05, Markus Metz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Moritz
On 09/09/12 16:34, Markus Metz wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Moritz Lennert
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be wrote:
On 07/09/12 09:05, Markus Metz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Moritz Lennert
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be wrote:
On 01/09/12 18:02, Moritz Lennert wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Moritz Lennert
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be wrote:
On 07/09/12 09:05, Markus Metz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Moritz Lennert
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be wrote:
On 01/09/12 18:02, Moritz Lennert wrote:
Leaving below mail as record of my original
On 01/09/12 18:02, Moritz Lennert wrote:
Leaving below mail as record of my original issue, I would to raise the
fundamental question of whether it would be feasible
1) to (optionally) provide geodesic instead of planar distances when
measuring, even if the location is in a projected coordinate
Leaving below mail as record of my original issue, I would to raise the
fundamental question of whether it would be feasible
1) to (optionally) provide geodesic instead of planar distances when
measuring, even if the location is in a projected coordinate system.
E.g. QGIS provides the