Few danish PROJ definitions are missing

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Few danish PROJ definitions are missing

Evan Haahr Hansen, LIFA A/S

Hi all

We are about to implement the PROJ libraries in our applications but it seems that a few Danish PROJ definitions are missing:

DNN  - We know that code says that it is “historical” but when you work with old maps you still need it

System City Ring – near Copenhagen

FK89 (EPSG code 3173) – for the Faroe Islands

 

I also think that there is a small error in the PROJ definition for UTM29N_FVR09. In the last part of the definition there is a reference to FO:UTM32N. Shouldn’t it be FO:UTM29N (which is defined in the line above) ?


Med venlig hilsen

Evan Haahr Hansen, LIFA A/S
Ingeniør

http://website.lifa.dk/docs/LIFA_GIS·IT_logo.png

T

6313 6800

@ 

[hidden email]

D

6313 6852

W

www.lifa.dk 

M

 

 


Vi tilbyder interne og eksterne kurser. Du kan finde mere information i vores kursuskalender


Følg os på LinkedIn og læs de seneste nyheder fra LIFA A/S Landinspektører


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Few danish PROJ definitions are missing

Kristian Evers-2
Evan,

Thanks for reporting this.

On 10 Aug 2018, at 08:21, Evan Haahr Hansen, LIFA A/S <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all
We are about to implement the PROJ libraries in our applications but it seems that a few Danish PROJ definitions are missing:

Awesome!

DNN  - We know that code says that it is “historical” but when you work with old maps you still need it
System City Ring – near Copenhagen
FK89 (EPSG code 3173) – for the Faroe Islands

These are all work in progress. I’m adding issues to the tracker [0], that should help prioritize them.

 
I also think that there is a small error in the PROJ definition for UTM29N_FVR09. In the last part of the definition there is a reference to FO:UTM32N. Shouldn’t it be FO:UTM29N (which is defined in the line above) ?


Fixed [1][2]. This will be released alongside PROJ 5.2 September 1st.


Kristian

[0] <a href="https://github.com/NordicGeodesy/NordicTransformations/issues?q=is:issue&#43;is:open&#43;sort:updated-desc" class="">https://github.com/NordicGeodesy/NordicTransformations/issues

Med venlig hilsen

Evan Haahr Hansen, LIFA A/S
Ingeniør

<image001.png>

T
6313 6800
@ 
D
6313 6852
W
M
 
 

Vi tilbyder interne og eksterne kurser. Du kan finde mere information i vores kursuskalender

<image002.png>
Følg os på LinkedIn og læs de seneste nyheder fra LIFA A/S Landinspektører

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj