search

covjson / specification

CoverageJSON specification
https://covjson.org/spec/
45 stars 6 forks source link

Should EngineeringCRSs be allowed? #82

Closed jonblower closed 2 years ago

jonblower commented 8 years ago

We don't have a strong use case for this at the moment, but it would probably not be much effort to allow spatial CRSs that are not geospatial (i.e. anchored to something that is not the Earth). These are known as "Engineering" CRSs I think and can be 2D or 3D (perhaps 1D too?). Use cases could include imagery (e.g. photographs) or something that's anchored to a moving platform.

letmaik commented 8 years ago

I would probably leave that until there's a specific use case from someone. After all, you can do that easily in your application via the extensions mechanism, so no need I think to put it in the spec at this point.

jonblower commented 8 years ago

That's fine - I wrote that before I realised that the extensions mechanism could be applied to CRS types.

letmaik commented 2 years ago

Closing this as the original question was answered and explicit first-class support without extension can always be added in a later version in a backwards-compatible way. My feeling is that noone will ask for it.