<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>We really need two codes, don’t we? One for the geographical datum
(ITRF2014 in GRS80, which is EPSG:7789 in your case) and one for the projection
UTM in GRS80 (which, I guess, doesn’t exist), perhaps an EPSG architecture
problem. To be frank, your expectation that the EPSG do for ITRF2014 what
it’s done for WGS84/UTM is unrealistic. Add ITRF2008 and so on, how many
combinations would that be?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=j1@jimenezshaw.com
href="mailto:j1@jimenezshaw.com">Javier Jimenez Shaw</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, April 17, 2021 3:56 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=ndzinn@comcast.net
href="mailto:ndzinn@comcast.net">Noel Zinn (cc)</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=PROJ@lists.osgeo.org
href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org">proj</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [PROJ] World UTM in a proper datum</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV dir=ltr>Hi Noel,
<DIV>If I am the only user of the data, I can do that (and whatever I want). But
if I have to produce accurate data processed by somebody else, I fall into the
hole of vagueness of WGS84. For instance, if I create a precise GeoTIFF and I
want to tag it with an EPSG, using EPSG:326XX is... vague. Or a GCP, or anything
else. There are several alternatives for the geographic crs.</DIV>
<DIV>I know I can apply UTM over ITRF2014 (GDAL does it easily). But there is no
EPSG code for that.</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_signature dir=ltr data-smartmail="gmail_signature">.___ ._ ..._
.. . ._. .___ .. __ . _. . __.. ... .... ._ .__<BR>Entre dos
pensamientos racionales <BR>hay infinitos pensamientos
irracionales.<BR><BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<DIV class=gmail_attr dir=ltr>On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 22:24, Noel Zinn (cc)
<<A href="mailto:ndzinn@comcast.net">ndzinn@comcast.net</A>>
wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Unlike an empirically-derived
datum transformation (e.g. WGS <> ITRF), which can have different levels
of "accuracy" depending how it was derived, a map projection (lat/lon <>
N/E) is defined mathematically and is precise, i.e. without error.
<SPAN> </SPAN>Having said that, there are better and worse algorithms for
UTM, but that's not the question you're asking. <SPAN> </SPAN>In a datum
transformation sense UTM will always be as (and only as) "accurate" as the
geographicals you convert to N/E. <SPAN> </SPAN>So, use EPSG:326XX and
EPSG327XX, but plug in your precise geographicals. <SPAN> </SPAN></P>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)"></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: calibri; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: rgb(245,245,245)">
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=j1@jimenezshaw.com href="mailto:j1@jimenezshaw.com"
target=_blank>Javier Jimenez Shaw</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, April 17, 2021 2:44 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=PROJ@lists.osgeo.org
href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" target=_blank>proj</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [PROJ] World UTM in a proper datum</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: calibri; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline">
<DIV dir=ltr>Hi
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Maybe there is a better place to talk about this, but I do not know which
one. I hope somebody from EPSG is reading this, and may give me a clue.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We have talked many times about the lack of accuracy of WGS84
(EPSG:4326), the datum ensemble, etc.</DIV>
<DIV>The problem is that I miss an accurate equivalent of the projected family
"WGS84 / UTM zone XXY"(EPSG:326XX and EPSG327XX) for XX between 1 and 60 and Y
is N or S. It would be nice something similar (a worldwide projected CRSs on
UTM), but over a proper accurate and well defined geographic CRS (ITRF2014,
WGS84(G1762), etc).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Do you know if there is any plan? Or do they exist and I was not able to
find them?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks.<BR clear=all>
<DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>.___ ._ ..._ .. . ._. .___ .. __ . _. . __.. ... ....
._ .__<BR>Entre dos pensamientos racionales <BR>hay infinitos pensamientos
irracionales.<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>PROJ mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org"
target=_blank>PROJ@lists.osgeo.org</A><BR><A
href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj"
target=_blank>https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj</A><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>