Re: "Trustworthiness" of vertical transformations
Kristian Evers <[email protected]> Wed, 27 Nov 2019 08:18:48 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gis.proj-4.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> The algorithm currently is rather > simple: just add the (in)accuracies of each step. I do have some vague > remembering from univ that this was not always the "right" thing to do from a > math point of view. I guess sometimes perhaps taking the max() would be more > appropriate. But given that we can potentially mix uncomparable things, > probably not that a big deal... Yeah, this can definitely be improved but it's a simple and effective solution that doesn't promise too much which is always better that saying that accuracy is better than it really is. I think this could be a fun topic to have a workshop on at the OSGeo code sprint in the spring. /Kristian -----Original Message----- From: Even Rouault <[email protected]> Sent: 27. november 2019 01:06 To: [email protected] Cc: Nyall Dawson <[email protected]>; Kristian Evers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PROJ] "Trustworthiness" of vertical transformations On mercredi 27 novembre 2019 09:34:33 CET Nyall Dawson wrote: > On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at 20:52, Kristian Evers <[email protected]> wrote: > > You can get the transformation accuracy using the API function > > proj_coordoperation_get_accuracy(). I think it would be cool if > > information about transformation accuracy where readily available in > > software like QGIS (nudge, nudge :-)) I should mention that the information about accuracy should be taken with a grain of salt for several reasons: - the EPSG guidance note 7-1 [1] underlines that the exact definition of accuracy varies according to geodetic agencies - in a number of situations, PROJ will have to synthetize the resulting accuracy when chaining several steps. The algorithm currently is rather simple: just add the (in)accuracies of each step. I do have some vague remembering from univ that this was not always the "right" thing to do from a math point of view. I guess sometimes perhaps taking the max() would be more appropriate. But given that we can potentially mix uncomparable things, probably not that a big deal... > That's where I'm coming from now... I'm just wondering if and how we > should expose vertical transformation functionality. Do you have any > ideas on what functionality you would expect an end-user application > to expose for vertical transformations? Depends on the use cases. If you want to aggregate point cloud datasets that are referenced against several vertical CRS into a single dataset, you will probably want to convert them into a single Geographic CRS (ITRF2014, WGS84 G1762) or a single CompoundCRS appropriate for the area of study so that they can be stashed together. Even [1] http://www.epsg.org/Portals/0/373-07-1.pdf , ยง6.5.4.1 Coordinate Operation accuracy -- Spatialys - Geospatial professional services http://www.spatialys.com _______________________________________________ PROJ mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj