You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello! Thanks to all the contributors for the work on this handy tool. This might not be an issue, but - should the checker return errors if a grid mapping variable is missing the attributes corresponding to "Map Parameters" in the Grid Mappings Appendix of the conventions?
Take for example the first grid mapping, Albers Conical Equal Area. Some parameters say "optional" (false_easting and false_northing), which seems to imply that the others would not be optional, right?
Currently, I can omit at least some of those "non-optional" parameters for multiple grid mappings (have tried the above and Polar Stereographic) and the checker doesn't flag it - I can give an example if needed. This seems intentional however, so I'm just wondering if there was a reason the checker doesn't do this, or if it is something that should be considered. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for raising this. I think this is something the checker could and should check for. It looks like this is missing from the conformance document. I will suggest this is added to the conformance document and then I can fix the checker.
Hello! Thanks to all the contributors for the work on this handy tool. This might not be an issue, but - should the checker return errors if a grid mapping variable is missing the attributes corresponding to "Map Parameters" in the Grid Mappings Appendix of the conventions?
Take for example the first grid mapping, Albers Conical Equal Area. Some parameters say "optional" (
false_easting
andfalse_northing
), which seems to imply that the others would not be optional, right?Currently, I can omit at least some of those "non-optional" parameters for multiple grid mappings (have tried the above and Polar Stereographic) and the checker doesn't flag it - I can give an example if needed. This seems intentional however, so I'm just wondering if there was a reason the checker doesn't do this, or if it is something that should be considered. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: