[CAP] Geospatial Elements

[Art Botterell]

Actually the main issue is less arcane than that.  In the CAP elements  
the coordinate order is "lat, lon".  In GML and GML-based formats such  
as GeoRSS and KML, it's "lon, lat", aka "axis order" (X before Y).   
Which is a bit hard to explain 'cause we had a senior representative  
of OGC on the Technical Committee, but it happened nonetheless.

Anyway, that's been the crux of the argument, whether it's worthwhile  
to fix that low-level inconsistency, and if so, how much of full GML's  
relatively heavy taggage should be invoked.  (Which is where we have  
some intersection with the multi-Info question, since if we don't have  
multiple Info blocks we may need to express more complex geometries.)

The CRS question was debated with considerable vigor during the CAP  
1.0 deliberations, but the consensus was that standardizing on WGS-84  
would make implementation a lot simpler, particularly on small  
devices, and I can't say I've heard any complaints on that score since  
then.

- Art


On Oct 25, 2007, at 10/25/07 8:34 PM, Mick Jagger wrote:

> Hi,
> 	A number of posts have mentioned changing CAP's geospatial elements  
> to use GML.  I think a clarification needs to be made about whether  
> the posters are talking about full-monty GML, or a custom CAP  
> profile akin to Simple.  To me the question boils down to whether  
> different Coordinate Reference Systems need to be available to CAP.   
> Anybody have a need for something other than WGS84?
>
> -- 
> lists at jpw.biz