The EPSG Contract

[Paul Ramsey]

The cubewerx servers support both specs.
P

On Jan 10, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Arnulf Christl wrote:

> Daniel Morissette wrote:
>> And about WMS 1.3, because of the mess that Paul described below  
>> there is no plan to support WMS 1.3 in MapServer in the forseeable  
>> future (or more specifically, I am not planning to do it anytime  
>> soon). I think WMS 1.1.1 is still the most popular out there  
>> anyway and might be for a bit.
>> Daniel
>> Paul Ramsey wrote:
>
> Thanks for the news, I did not exactly expect it to be good news  
> anyway... :-)
>
> Does anybody know of a WMS that is accessible online/free for  
> testing purposes that can switch serving 1.1.1 and 1.3 on the fly  
> "correctly"? It gives me a headache overlaying WMS 1.1.1 and 1.3 in  
> one client.
>
> Probably we will have to stick to 1.1.1 until this issue has been  
> resolved at a "global" scale. Pity for the other stuff that gets  
> supported in 1.3 though.
>
> Messymessymessy.
>
> Best,
>
>>> Well, the news from OGC on the WFS/GML issue seems to be to  
>>> accept  the implemented facts on the ground for older  
>>> representations of epsg  codes ("EPSG:XXXX") and enforce the  
>>> "consistent" behavior for newer  representations of epsg codes  
>>> (urn notation).  And the WMS 1.3  specification remains as writ,  
>>> so when Mapserver implements 1.3 it  will need to follow the  
>>> specification, such as it is.
>>>
>>> This implies, incidentally, some extra infrastructure at the  
>>> backend,  because the current Mapserver source of EPSG CRS  
>>> information, the  proj4 library, does not include ordinate order  
>>> in its backend epsg  database (the epsg file).  That leaves a  
>>> pair of unpleasant  implementation paths: add a whole new concept  
>>> into proj4, and then  have mapserver require the new library  
>>> version in order to support  WMS 1.3; or do a hack solution and  
>>> simply assume all +proj=longlat  combinations have reversed  
>>> ordinates, unfortunately the hack will  omit other cases, like  
>>> several south african and some european  projects, that also have  
>>> a northing/easting order.
>>>
>>> So long story long: no news :)
>>>
>>> P
>>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2006, at 8:30 AM, Arnulf Christl wrote:
>>>
>>>> Any news here? Sorry if i missed it. We want to support 1.3 and  
>>>> are  trying to get an overview of which services will support it  
>>>> in  which way. We are the poor last layer and have to deal with   
>>>> whatever you spit at us.
>>>>
>>>> Best, Arnulf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul Ramsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have also tried the Intergraph WFS and it is in easting/  
>>>>> northing, so
>>>>> that makes 3 so far:
>>>>>   Mapserver
>>>>>   Cubewerx
>>>>>   Intergraph
>>>>> Will be interesting to hear what the wfs list says.
>>>>> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/19/05, Paul Ramsey <pramsey at refractions.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it so bad to suck it up and follow the standards  
>>>>>>> consensus,  no matter
>>>>>>> how silly? Sometimes bad decisions are made, but walking  
>>>>>>> away  from the
>>>>>>> process destroys all the good decisions too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do see your point, and I have certainly accepted that when   
>>>>>> MapServer
>>>>>> implements WMS 1.3 it will have to address this issue  
>>>>>> properly.   However,
>>>>>> the WFS stuff has existed for quite a while (as has GML) but  
>>>>>> this  issue
>>>>>> is only being raised now in the WFS/GML context.  So we are left
>>>>>> having to back-fix without any obvious indicate of what is  
>>>>>> really  the right
>>>>>> thing to do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I *suspect* that at least for GML 2 the coordinate system does  
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> control order of values in coordinate tuples.  I'm sure I have  
>>>>>> heard
>>>>>> previous detailed discussios to this effect.  I am not at all   
>>>>>> sure of
>>>>>> the situation with GML3.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hopefully we can isolate these issues to GML3 and WMS 1.3+ so  
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> a simple version check will suffice to make the decision clear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>