[Proj] [gdal-dev] Coordinate system improvements - GDAL, libgeotiff, PROJ barn raising

[Kristian Evers]

Even,

You can get the GIGS documents here:

https://www.iogp.org/bookstore/product/geospatial-integrity-of-geoscience-software-part-1-gigs-guidelines/
https://www.iogp.org/bookstore/product/geospatial-integrity-of-geoscience-software-part-2-gigs-software-review/
http://www.iogp.org/bookstore/product/geospatial-integrity-of-geoscience-software-part-3-user-guide-for-the-gigs-test-dataset/

Unfortunately the test datasets comes in unstructured spreadsheets… Micah Cochran did a tremendous job of translating
that JSON for use with pyproj which I then a year or so later converted to the gie format.

There are still a number of tests that we can’t reliable pass in PROJ. I believe some, if not all, of them will be taken care
of during the work you have now committed to.

/Kristian


On 15 May 2018, at 19:42, Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com<mailto:even.rouault at spatialys.com>> wrote:

Hi Martin,



Thanks for the pointers and interest. I'm certainly interested in seing solid testing and interoperability.



>
> Is there already a plan for the testing parts?



Not yet, but there will be definitely tests.



> I may be interested to
> participate on the creation of a test suite. The Open Geospatial
> Consortium (OGC) has a GeoAPI project which already provides some
> implementation-independent tests (through a standard API) for WKT 2,
> EPSG and GIGS (some examples below).



Where is GIGS described ? I couldn't find much online documentation. I do see proj has now a test/gigs directory with tests converted to the .gie format, but I couldn't find the source content



> Those tests are run for a few years
> by Apache SIS. They are in Java, but Proj.4 is already able to execute
> some of them through the JNI wrappers. In addition, Python bindings are
> in progress.



Python bindings over what ?



>
> Of course Proj will have its own tests in C. The GeoAPI tests would be a
> complement. An advantage of GeoAPI tests would be that, by running the
> same set of tests on different implementations, we increase (I think)
> the confidence that the WKT 2 or EPSG codes are really interpreted in
> the same way by those different implementations.



I guess the GeoAPI tests would be needed to be ported/adapted to whatever solution is adopted for proj testing. I don't really feel like using the proj JNI wrapper through Apache SIS would be an ideal solution : too many components aggegated, and I'm not sure if JNI wrapper will have all the new capabilities exposed.



Even



--
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com<http://www.spatialys.com/>
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
Proj at lists.maptools.org<mailto:Proj at lists.maptools.org>
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/proj/attachments/20180515/45b02ee0/attachment.html>