As a follow up to:
http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-May/001964.html
I am just reminding you that you have 3 more days to submit
nominations for new Charter Members for OSGeo. See above URL for
more information.
Please send to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include a clear reason for
Hi All, follows the first post and announcement message sent to
various lists regarding the creation of the list. As I know there are
some portuguese speakers here that aren't on other lists. So Here it
goes (in portuguese)
Also, non brazilians, but otherwise portuguese speakers are invited.
BTW
2007/5/31, Eduardo Patto Kanegae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
For a given geometry(described at the end of message), we calculated
values using "to UTM WGS84" and "to UTM SAD69"
and have different values.
- Hectares using Transform(...,29183) = 30,9977784638335
- Hectares using Transform(...,32723) = 3
Thanks Steve. I forgot to THINK before writing. :-)
With this error sizing for a milion of hectares, just 6 hectares will be
the difference.
best
Eduardo
Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
Wouldn't you want to use an equiarea projection to calculate the area?
or are these small enough that is does n
Wouldn't you want to use an equiarea projection to calculate the area?
or are these small enough that is does not matter. I would expect some
numerical rounding error, does this difference fall into that?
All questions, no answers today :)
-Steve W
Eduardo Patto Kanegae wrote:
Hi folks,
A c
Hi folks,
A cartographic doubt:
We have a WGS 84 dataset ( EPSG:4326 ) and the need to to calculate
(in hectares) the area of each polygon. To do this, we are currently
transforming
these objects for our local common UTM spatial reference ( SAD69,
EPSG:29183 ) .
But, I was thinking if maybe th
