-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update spatial docs for 3.0 #1719
Conversation
Resolves dotnet#1639, fixes dotnet#1260
Address feedback
= new CoordinateSystemServices( | ||
new CoordinateSystemFactory(), | ||
new CoordinateTransformationFactory(), | ||
new Dictionary<int, string> | ||
{ | ||
// Coordinate systems: | ||
|
||
// (3857 and 4326 included automatically) | ||
[4326] = GeographicCoordinateSystem.WGS84.WKT, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@airbreather Is it by design that these aren't included by default anymore? Or a bug?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I haven't done a proper bisect to confirm, but it looks like it was a consequence of NetTopologySuite/ProjNet4GeoAPI@1f3b73d0. I feel like it might have been unintentional, but I can't say for sure, since EPSG isn't the only authority...
@FObermaier thoughts? Specifically, we've changed the behavior when someone passes in a non-null
IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<int, string>>
to one of these constructors. Previously, we would have auto-included SRIDs 3857 and 4326 without needing the user to give us the WKT for them, but now it's up to the user to add these themselves if they want them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(while I was looking at that diff, I noticed a race condition in the old code that this change would have solved, which leads me to believe that the old behavior may actually have been the unintentional part)
Resolves #1639, fixes #1260