Closed esilvia closed 1 year ago
Added clarifying language for the aggregate model systems, typo fixes, during today's LWG call. Merged into 1.5 draft and complete!
Do I understand it correct that with the upcoming 1.5 standard we can finally extract the date range a pointcloud file was acquired just by reading the header (without having a look at every single points gpstime)?
(also refers to https://github.com/ASPRSorg/LAS/issues/138 and https://github.com/PDAL/wrench/issues/36)
That's certainly the idea. Like everything else in the header, it depends on the writer of the file to put the correct values in.
Kirk
On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 6:13 AM Jens Wiesehahn @.***> wrote:
Do I understand it correct that with the upcoming 1.5 standard we can finally extract the date range a pointcloud file was recorded just by reading the header (without having a look at every single points gpstime)?
(also refers to #138 https://github.com/ASPRSorg/LAS/issues/138 and PDAL/wrench#36 https://github.com/PDAL/wrench/issues/36)
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ASPRSorg/LAS/issues/118#issuecomment-2464434249, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA5B33PV5JSLZTLI7QDVFQLZ7SMDTAVCNFSM6AAAAABRNIGPOWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINRUGQZTIMRUHE . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
Do I understand it correct that with the upcoming 1.5 standard we can finally extract the date range a pointcloud file was acquired just by reading the header (without having a look at every single points gpstime)?
copc.io has gpstime ranges in its VLR info if you want a jump start on that capability.
Oh thanks, didn't knew it was implemented in COPC.
Is there an estimated release time for 1.5?
The draft version of LAS 1.5 should be ready in time for GeoWeek 2025, February 10-12.
I think it might be worthwhile to add a Min/Max Timestamp to the LAS 1.5 header. It would share encoding with the PDRF timestamps, including the new encoding format from #6.
Because of the diversity of interpretation of several of the fields (e.g., PtSourceID), it's probably not realistic to add MBRs for every field to the LAS header itself. We can use a VLR for that, as in #39. This thread should be constrained to discussing adding just the timestamp range to the header.