From: Jody G. <jod...@gm...> - 2009-04-30 10:45:21
|
> Long story short, lying in the CRS breaks > common interfaces, puts us at odds with GeoApi, and > does not get any further than putting the dimensions in > any other position I proposed. Okay. > The coordinate sequence position is the most promising imho, > as the transformation code has to deal with it anyways, > and it can compare the cs dimension with the srs one and > learn it has to play the "copy coordinates beyond the first > two over" trick. I like that alternative; it is "closer" to the data leaving us less chance for errors then a hint. I hope it also limits the amount of work you need to do. Jody |