[GRASS-user] problem in exporting grass2idrisi

[Hamish]

Markus wrote:
> Looking at
> http://www.gdal.org/frmt_Idrisi.html
> it seems that Int16 is supported:
> 
> "This format is basically a raw one. There is just one band per files,
> except in the RGB24 data type where the Red, Green and Blue bands are
> store interleafed by pixels in the order Blue, Green and Red. The
> others data type are unsigned 8 bits integer with values from 0 to 255
> or signed 16 bits integer with values from -32.768 to 32.767 or 32
> bits single precision floating point.32 bits."


Probably not very helpful to the current issue, but I am reminded of this
(old) wish report,
  http://intevation.de/rt/webrt?serial_num=1069


==========================
> On Mar 27, 2002, David A Hastings wrote:
> > I hope to set up the database so that source (e.g. PERMANENT) data will
> > be readable on both GRASS and Idrisi.  GRASS and Idrisi 8-bit
> > uncompressed cell files are identical, one can use links to headers, so
> > that source data are interoperable on both systems.  I have been doing
> > this since 1995.  If GRASS let one specify an actual 2-byte integer, and
> > specify the byte ordering (say as enhancements to CELLHD files), as is
> > possible in programs such as Photoshop, the interoperability would be
> > better.  And Idrisi has had floating point cell files since its
> > inception - though I won't know about compatibility issues with GRASS 5
> > for another few weeks.  Finally, if GRASS could let the user force files
> > to remain uncompressed (again, a field in the CELLHD file),
> > interoperability would be helped at the cost of (now cheap) disk space.
Markus wrote:
> If you don't mind, I'll send above to the developers list. Maybe we can
> do something.
David wrote:
I'd love to see you make a suggestion.  I would do it myself, but I'm
overwhelmed with the move right now.  It has been a BIG pain to me that the
history of the Open GRASS Foundation (which became the Open GIS Consortium
when CERL stopped funding OGF for doing things that were inappropriate in
CERL's eyes) causes the Open GIS Consortium to ignore the best starting
platform for open GIS (e.g. GRASS). Nevertheless, GRASS and Idrisi have
existing "de-facto" interoperability at the file level, and are a great
conceptual model for enhancing such interoperability if they could cooperate
on "just a couple of small detials." The complementarity of GRASS and Idrisi
(and perhaps ERDAS, but this might be less likely), and the research aspect
of both GRASS and Idrisi, should be a great motivation to modestly pursue
such interoperability.

> > Regards to all,
> > David Hastings


===================================
Eric Miller & David then go on to discuss the differences and similarities.


fyi, an interesting read..

Hamish