On Nov 4, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Mike Grant wrote: > On 28/07/10 14:19, Mike Grant wrote: >> On 27/07/10 20:53, Howard Butler wrote: >>> Your file is properly broken now :) >> >> Perfect - that gives me more incentive to nag for the new processor >> release ;) >> >> It might be worth marking the sample I gave you as broken until we get a >> new one, so as not to confuse people. > > I'm reminded by the talk of bad files that we got an update to our LAS > 1.3 processor :) See if this reprocessed sample blows anything else up.. > > http://arsf-dan.nerc.ac.uk/files/NERC-ARSF-LAS1_3-sample-release2.tar.bz2
Mike, I can't remember if this was one of the "issues" [1] with those files, but it may want to cause you to club somebody upside the head :) <https://lidarbb.cr.usgs.gov/index.php?showtopic=11388> Howard [1] Issues in scare quotes because it's not an issue, just the spec "committee" being careless with changesets on the document_______________________________________________ Liblas-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/liblas-devel
