<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:AM0P192MB0482D8688DD8394826098EECEFAA9@AM0P192MB0482.EURP192.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            lang="EN-GB">ER wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            lang="EN-GB">></span><span lang="EN-GB"> The null
            transformation between ETRS89 and ETRF2014 comes with the
            definition of the datum ensemble ETRS89 (cf change
          </span><a href="https://github.com/OSGeo/PROJ/issues/3263"
            moz-do-not-send="true"><span lang="EN-GB">https://github.com/OSGeo/PROJ/issues/3263</span></a><span
            lang="EN-GB">)</span><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">The problem is not the
            null transformation between the ensemble and its members,
            but that the transformation route through ETRF2014 is
            recommended. In my opinion, the route trough ETRF2000 should
            be the default. Not only for the Netherlands but, for Europe
            in general. </span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    PROJ has no idea of what is recommended/preferred by European
    geodestists ;-) It only trusts records in its database.<br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:AM0P192MB0482D8688DD8394826098EECEFAA9@AM0P192MB0482.EURP192.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Thus ETRS89 ->
            ETRF2000 -> ITRF2000 -> ITRF2014
          </span><span lang="EN-GB">instead of </span><span
            lang="EN-GB">ETRS89 -> ETRF2014 -> ITRF2014. What
            makes PROJ choose the latter?</span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>PROJ can only infer pipelines with at most one intermediate CRS.
      If you want <span lang="EN-GB">ETRS89 -> ETRF2000 ->
        ITRF2000 -> ITRF2014, you need an explicit concatenated
        operation chaining the 3 individual steps.</span></p>
    <p><span lang="EN-GB">Even</span></p>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.spatialys.com">http://www.spatialys.com</a>
My software is free, but my time generally not.</pre>
  </body>
</html>