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
PeterParslow opened this issue
Mar 21, 2024
· 1 comment
Labels
19125-1Geographic information — Simple feature access — Part 1: Common architectureJAGISO/TC 211 - OGC Joint Advisory Group (JAG) - AG 4WG4ISO/TC 211 WG4, Geospatial servicesWG9ISO/TC 211 WG9, Information management
OGC Simple Feature Access (https://www.ogc.org/standard/sfa/) caters for geometries in 3D space; ISO 19125-1 constrains itself to 2D space.
Yet the OGC document states that is is "also known as ISO 19125".
There is a lot of history to this which (hopefully!) does not matter now, but it is a confusing situation for users & reviewers.
Would it be best to fast track the OGC document to be a new edition of ISO 19125-1, even though the OGC document is pretty old (published 2006, corrigendum 2010)?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
PeterParslow
added
19125-1
Geographic information — Simple feature access — Part 1: Common architecture
JAG
ISO/TC 211 - OGC Joint Advisory Group (JAG) - AG 4
WG4
ISO/TC 211 WG4, Geospatial services
WG9
ISO/TC 211 WG9, Information management
labels
Mar 21, 2024
OGC is in the midst of updating Simple Features Access to a new multipart document. That work should go to vote in June 2024 and OGC will be happy to submit a NWIP for revision of the ISO equivalent work.
19125-1Geographic information — Simple feature access — Part 1: Common architectureJAGISO/TC 211 - OGC Joint Advisory Group (JAG) - AG 4WG4ISO/TC 211 WG4, Geospatial servicesWG9ISO/TC 211 WG9, Information management
OGC Simple Feature Access (https://www.ogc.org/standard/sfa/) caters for geometries in 3D space; ISO 19125-1 constrains itself to 2D space.
Yet the OGC document states that is is "also known as ISO 19125".
There is a lot of history to this which (hopefully!) does not matter now, but it is a confusing situation for users & reviewers.
Would it be best to fast track the OGC document to be a new edition of ISO 19125-1, even though the OGC document is pretty old (published 2006, corrigendum 2010)?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: