On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Evans, James R Civ USAF ACC 84 RADES/SCZE < james.ev...@hill.af.mil> wrote:
> So, I'm guessing there's no easy way to automate this? Even looking at the > states, some of the states are in two zones, and Texas is across 3 zones. > At least the naming convention of the files indicate the UTM zone. James, Note it is pretty easy to write a script (ie. in Python) that would walk the directory tree and sort the images into distinct (per utm zone) collections. So, yes, the processing of this data is very automatable. > For > instance: m_2408002_ne_17_1_20100422_201001123.jp2, is in zone 17. As far > as I can tell, all the files in a particular directory are all in the same > UTM zone. I could create a layer for each UTM zone across CONUS, but > that's > not going to be particularly useful to my users. I'm thinking of making a > layer for each state. For the stats that cross zones, there will probably > be two layers. For Texas, there would be Texas_east, Texas_middle, and > Texas_west. I will probably limit visibility until zoomed in sufficiently > Is it important to you to distinguish things by state? If not, why not one layer per utm zone, and then join them in a layer group 'UTM NAIP' that the users would either turn on or off? > to see the whole state on the screen anyway, since the continental view of > this data is pretty crappy anyway. Limiting visibility to reasonable resolutions should be fine and would help you avoiding needing additional preprocessing to create an overview of the whole collection. > So now it seems like it will be a lot of > grunt work just copying these directories up to the server, and going > through and creating a shape file index for each state. For states in more > than one UTM, there would be more than one shape. Then I'll have to add a > layer for to my mapfile for each shapefile, using the correct projection. > Is there an easier way? I'm starting with Oklahoma, which is also in three > UTM zones. I'll get that working before moving on. Any suggestions on > making this pretty would be welcomed. :-) > Well, I still think you should take states out of the equation unless that is important to your users. Good luck, Best regards, -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer
_______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users