[FOSS-GPS] Does anyone know that why RTKLIB does not support NMEA input?

[Danny Miller]

Not only that but the NMEA I've seen doesn't even have the accuracy.  
 From what I saw on the NVS units, monitoring data showed approx 5" 
resolution in lat/long in my location.

The binary format, however, has something like sub-cm resolution. Let me 
be clear this wasn't RTK, just ordinary position fixes, and the absolute 
accuracy was NOT on that scale, however, the relative accuracy and 
stability of a position fix was remarkable- the point is that it looks 
like they didn't represent as many digits in NMEA.  AFAIK the NMEA 
standard didn't dictate how many digits could be given but I have a 
theory is there may be an ad-hoc standard in some NMEA parsers that 
won't handle an unusually high number of digits.

NMEA isn't very compact, either.

That's the difference in reading normal fixes between binary and NMEA 
formats.  As Yebin says, it's irrelevant for RTK: RTK can ONLY with work 
with pseudorange/carrier phase/doppler data which is NEVER present in NMEA.

Just to be be clear, there are 3 things here: NMEA and vendor-specific 
binary mode are both transport formats.  Raw data is additional info 
which has only been presented in vendor-specific binary mode data.  
Hypothetically speaking, raw data COULD be presented in NMEA in subset 
of vendor-specific $prefix words, but there is little reason to do so.

Danny

On 10/3/2012 9:31 AM, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> Yebin Lee <yblee87 at gmail.com> writes:
>> I'm just wondering that why RTKLIB only support raw protocol input instead
>> of NMEA which is popularly used in common GPS receivers.
>> Is there a reason for this?
> Because NMEA does not contain pseudorange measurements?
> _______________________________________________
> This message is sent to you from FOSS-GPS at lists.osgeo.org mailing list.
> Visit http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss-gps to manage your subscription
> For more information, check http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS-GPS
>