[Proj] Update of EPSG database to v8.4

[Mikael Rittri]

Dear Even,

Thanks for your e-mail and your efforts. A gdal_datum.csv for the latest EPSG version is very useful to me. So I downloaded it from the GDAL trunk, but I found an issue. 

Line 46 is: 

1067,Peru96,geodetic,"ITRF94 at epoch 1995.4.  Densification of SIRGAS95 network in Peru, consisting of 47 passive geodetic stations and 3 continuous recording GPS stations.",1996,7019,8901,1189,Geodetic survey.,"Densification of SIRGAS 1995 within Peru. Replaces PSAD56 (datum code 6248) in Peru.","Details taken from national realizations page of WWW.SIRGAS.ORG, confirmed by reports from IGN Peru.",OGP,"2011/03/20",2011.018,0,"D_SIRGAS-Chile"

Where the last entry, "D_SIRGAS-Chile", seems to be wrong. On the page 

http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/arcgis-rest-api/index.html#//02r300000105000000

I found the entry

5373
GCS_Peru96
GEOGCS["GCS_Peru96",DATUM["D_Peru96",SPHEROID["GRS_1980",6378137.0,298.257222101]],PRIMEM["Greenwich",0.0],UNIT["Degree",0.0174532925199433]]

and I interpret this as saying that the ESRI name for the datum of EPSG:5373 is "D_Peru96", not "D_SIRGAS-Chile". 

(A check with www.epsg-registry.org confirms that the GeogCRS with code EPSG:5373 is named Peru96 and has a datum with code 1067 that is also named Peru96.)

Maybe the new version of add_esri_column.py can be blamed for this? I haven't checked whether the error occurs in previous versions of gdal_datum.csv. 

However, I admit that generally, I found that your generated ESRI datum names were correct more often than my own current effort. Well done! 

Best regards,

Mikael Rittri
Carmenta
Sweden
http://www.carmenta.com

-----Original Message-----
From: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org [mailto:proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org] On Behalf Of Even Rouault
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 12:57 PM
To: proj at lists.maptools.org
Subject: [Proj] Update of EPSG database to v8.4

Hi,

I've followed the update process of the EPSG SRS database to latest v8.4, and 
just committed the updated files into libgeotiff, GDAL and PROJ trunk. Also 
submitted to PostGIS.

>From what I can see, among many changes and additions, 2 new projection 
methods have been added:
* 1051,Lambert Conic Conformal (2SP Michigan)
--> looks very close to standard "Lambert Conic Conformal (2SP)", with the 
addition of a new parameter K, the ellipsoid scaling factor.
* 1052,Colombia Urban

I don't think any of those 2 new methods are currently handled by PROJ, so the 
new PCS based on those projection methods (3 Michigan SRS, and several dozains 
of Colombia PCS) will not be handled by GDAL nor PROJ.

Regarding GDAL, I've improved the add_esri_column.py script (see 
http://trac.osgeo.org/geotiff/changeset/2446), so that we have more ESRI DATUM 
names. That should make morphing from/to ESRI .prj files a bit better.

Regarding PROJ.4 'espg' and PostGIS spatial_ref_sys.sql files, I've also added 
the list of SRS that are GEOCCS (GeoCentric) and COMPD_CS (Compound Horizontal 
+ Vertical).

Please let me know if you see issues.

libgeotiff:
http://trac.osgeo.org/geotiff/ticket/63
http://trac.osgeo.org/geotiff/changeset/2447

GDAL:
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/5462
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/changeset/27322

PROJ:
http://trac.osgeo.org/proj/ticket/236
http://trac.osgeo.org/proj/changeset/2448

Submitted for PostGIS :
http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/2737

Best regards,

Even

-- 
Geospatial professional services
http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
Proj at lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj