<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2010/6/17 Hamish <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hamish_b@yahoo.com">hamish_b@yahoo.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>you have to create a GRASS Location for each source map projection, then<br>
pull them all into the target Location with r.proj or v.proj.<br></blockquote><div><br>Hi Hamish, thanks for the infos.<br><br><br>Here is one thing I can't get into my head.<br><br>First there is the problem that I do not know the coordinates and projection etc of the two files mentioned. Of course I can go to someone with esri-software and ask him to check that for me.<br>
<br>But in my (apparently very naive) view I this is completely not the point. If I have to use esri anyway then why bother taking data into grass ??<br><br>What I would think is this: If I can find out the projection/coordinates etc of the shapefile by any manual means then this info MUST BE included in the shapefile itself. Along with the actual geodata. <br>
<br>More so the import-program within grass cannot import even a single byte without thorough knowledge of the imported format, but i seems that it can only read objects but not their coordinate-system.<br><br><br>So: If all the info is already in the shapefile there then why <br>
<br>1) do I have to manually find it by some way outside grass and <br><br>2) why doesn't the import-program simply read that info from the file, read the coordinates and projection from the current location and the call the appropriate projection-program to reproject the imported file to fit the current location.<br>
<br>All the infos (proj/coord/bounds/etc) of import and target are there (says the naive man :-) , the sequence of operations is completely obvious and always exactly the same and yet everything has to be done manually.<br>
<br>If I want to recode a moviefile to another format I tell the encoder what I want to have as an output and the encoder then looks by itself what format the original has. What is different about geodata ?<br><br>I don't really mind doing that for one map. But somehow I expect lots more maps from different sources being added later and each one causing lots of work. What is it I don't understand here?<br>
<br> <br><br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">
> 3) how to export an ascii/excel/csv-list of every raster-point with a)<br>
> the corresponding scalar and b) the administrative region and c) the<br>
> coordinates lat/long of the raster-point<br>
<br>
</div>r.out.xyz, or r.to.vect + v.out.ascii<br>
maybe with some other custom magic along the way.<br></blockquote><div><br>Thanks, that sounds promising. I will try ASAP.<br><br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
from the command line GDAL's ogr2ogr and gdalwarp can reproject shapefiles<br>
and GeoTiffs etc directly.<br></blockquote><div><br>Tried that (on ubuntu) :<br><br>user@nb ~ $ gdalwarp file1.shp file1.out<br>ERROR 4: `file1.shp' not recognised as a supported file format.<br><br>and: gdalwrap --formats lists 88 formats including a few from esri, but no shapefile.<br>
<br><br>stn<br><br><br></div></div>