[OSGeo-Standards] Activity report w.r.t my OGC Standards membership slot

Tom Kralidis tomkralidis at gmail.com
Sun Mar 8 05:32:59 PDT 2020

Thanks for the report Even, fantastic work here!  Great topics for
upcoming OSGeo events.


On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:14 AM Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Some words about my use of my OGC Standards membership slot. I've been involved the past
> year with the GeoTIFF and CRS SWG.
> On the GeoTIFF front, things are calming down now that GeoTIFF 1.1 has been approved as a
> OGC standard. GeoTIFF 1.1 support has been implemented in libgeotiff master (to be 1.6.0)
> and GDAL master (to be 3.1.0). The possibility of further work as GeoTIFF 1.2 or 2.0 has been
> raised, but there doesn't seem to be immediate interest/need for that. There have also been
> some discussions about what to do with Cloud Optimized GeoTIFF, like a best practice document
> or something like that, but not sure something concrete will emerge from that.
> On the CRS front, the revisions of Abstract Topic 2 and WKT CRS (WKT:2019) were adopted
> last year, and no major work on them is likely in the near future. PROJ 6 has implemented them.
> There are now discussions about the possible standardization of a format to convey geodetic grids
> (that is datasets like NTv2/.gsb for horizontal datum adjustmenet, or .gtx for geoid models). Those
> discussions resurfaced just at the very moment where the PROJ team was starting a new development
> to use TIFF and GeoTIFF as a standardized format, in a profile we called Geodetic TIFF grids (GTG).
> This effort has culminated with the release of PROJ 7 at the beginning of this month, and the
> creation of a Content Delivery Network with 242 datasets to date available at https://cdn.proj.org.
> We presented this work yesterday to the CRS SWG with the following slide deck:
> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/19xRCR9zNIwsvLls1ciZfCdqhT4C8PEOohDAlKGF57R0/edit?usp=sharing
> Reception for now has been rather mild from the SWG to be honest, with apparent preference
> from other members of the SWG for netCDF or HDF based formats, but at least we've shown leadership
> by creating a spec and delivering a working implementation in records time :-)
> We do have seen interest from a few geodetic agencies part with the PROJ community, and we'd
> like to see more to be aware of this work. So do not hesitate to spread the word around you.
> A few other relevant links regarding this topic:
> - https://proj.org/community/rfc/rfc-4.html : motivations and discussion about pros & cons of various formats
> - https://proj.org/specifications/geodetictiffgrids.html : the specification of the GTG profile
> - https://cdn.proj.org : where the grids are, and as a bonus, a small map demonstrating Javascript client-side use of GeoTIFF
> - https://github.com/OSGeo/PROJ-data/tree/master/grid_tools : tools & documentation to generate GTG.
> Even
> --
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> http://www.spatialys.com
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Standards at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards

More information about the Standards mailing list