Hi,
Am 19.07.19 um 23:47 schrieb Nyall Dawson:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 23:15, Andreas Neumann wrote:
Hi Nyall and others,
I was wrong, there is no difference in behaviour between proj493 and proj520.
Nor is there a difference between Linux and Windows.
We, as a user, made the mistake of
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 23:15, Andreas Neumann wrote:
> For myself, I decided to never make fun again about other people not
> understanding projections, given that I make such mistakes myself ...
I had this moment of realisation too while reading through
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 23:15, Andreas Neumann wrote:
>
> Hi Nyall and others,
>
> I was wrong, there is no difference in behaviour between proj493 and proj520.
> Nor is there a difference between Linux and Windows.
>
> We, as a user, made the mistake of creating test data in a new empty layer at
Hi Nyall and others,
I was wrong, there is no difference in behaviour between proj493 and
proj520. Nor is there a difference between Linux and Windows.
We, as a user, made the mistake of creating test data in a new empty
layer at around (0,0) and my colleague in a totally different area in
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 00:38, Andreas Neumann wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We are having issues on the QGIS 3.4 release that the difference between and
> ellipsoidical and planimetric distance (and area) is huge. Too huge.
>
> We have this issue on Windows 3.4.9, but on Linux (a bit newer commit) I
>
Andreas,
How do your results compare with the "Shape Tools" measurement tool? It is
based on the geographiclib library.
Calvin
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:38 AM Andreas Neumann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are having issues on the QGIS 3.4 release that the difference between
> and ellipsoidical and
Hi,
We are having issues on the QGIS 3.4 release that the difference between
and ellipsoidical and planimetric distance (and area) is huge. Too huge.
We have this issue on Windows 3.4.9, but on Linux (a bit newer commit) I
don't have the same huge difference, but rather a very reasonable one.
