[Qgis-user] [Qgis-developer] Projection of ESPG/ESRI

[Randal Hale]

Awesome - OK - I didn't know project on the fly would assign a 
projection. I usually leave it off - All the data needs to be in one 
projection anyway.

I should have known about the EPSG thing - I was too wrapped up in the 
data. I think having it as something other than EPSG would be better and 
probably would help some - but you are right the name ESRI would most 
likely kick up a stink of some sort.

I appreciate it.

Randy

-----------------
Randal Hale, GISP
North River Geographic Systems, Inc
http://www.northrivergeographic.com
423.653.3611 rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
<mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com>
twitter:rjhale
http://about.me/rjhale

On 11/27/2013 02:12 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
> On 11/27/2013 10:56 AM, Randal Hale wrote:
>> So this question was going to be epic and confusing - and I just figured
>> it out. I also Cross posted this to the developers list - so excuse the
>> duplication.
>>
>> I have a user who sent me  data in Georgia West State Plane NAD83 Feet.
>> In QGIS this comes up as a custom projection so I decided to define it.
>> According to QGIS I ended up with two EPSG choices - EPSG 102667 and
>> EPSG 2240. So this lead to some back and forth on my part mostly because
>> I was working tired. I searched the EPSG database and there is no
>> 102667. This led to some head banging on my part.
>>
>> I searched http://spatialreference.org/ref/?search=Georgia+West+ and
>> 102667 is defined as an ESRI projection. Except in QGIS it comes up as
>> EPSG. Can this be fixed - can it be referenced as ESRI as opposed to EPSG?
>>
> I think that's a minor semantics issue, it's common knowledge that EPSG
> code's over 10,000 are not actually official EPSG. But I'm not sure that
> the label is stored in the db. Will have to look into that. More a
> request to the developers list than here. And then of course I wonder if
> we'll get in trouble for using the term ESRI without a trademark note.
> Technically yes those projections come from the ESRI definitions, but
> I'd guess that someone outside ESRI actually converted them to proj strings.
>
>> Also - it seems when I pull data without a projection it inherits EPSG
>> 4326 (WGS84) - is there a way in QGIS to pull in data with no
>> projection? In some cases we have to figure it out - so it coming in as
>> undefined is more helpful than inheriting an incorrect projection.
>>
> Just leave Projection on the fly off (the default). That will give you
> the behavior of a naive coordinate system and a chance to figure out and
> define the correct coordinate system.
>
>> Anyway - Happy Thanksgiving for those of you who fall in that geographic
>> social area.
>>
>> Randy
>>
> Thanks,
> Alex