[Proj] stere/sterea and Polish "System 65" (epsg:2174)

Maciek Sieczka werchowyna at pf.pl
Thu Mar 3 17:03:50 EST 2005

From: "Frank Warmerdam" <fwarmerdam at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Proj] stere/sterea and Polish "System 65" (epsg:2174)

> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:36:24 +0100, Maciek Sieczka <werchowyna at pf.pl> 
> wrote:
>> Issues arise:
>> 1. Wouldn't it be good to replace the "stere" epsg 2171-2174 with 
>> "sterea"
>> in the epsg and esri PROJ4 definitions?
>> 2. It would also make sense to change their descriptions into what it 
>> should
>> be - "System 1965" ("Uklad 1965" in Polish). "Pulkovo 42" is wrong and
>> missleading as in Poland we have another, different grid called "System
>> 1942".
> Maciek,
> These definitions are automatically derived from the EPSG tables, and
> I am not convinced that replacing stere with sterea would necessarily
> match better in all cases.

I don't mean all cases. I'm only quite sure about epsg 2171-2174, which are 
the four zones of Polish "System 65".

>  Does EPSG use different projection
> methods codes for different kinds of stere?  If not it may be hard to
> know where to apply what.

I wouldn't know too.

> I would add that similar issues apply for the description.
> However, if the EPSG derived definitions are bad enough, and
> you  can't reasonably fix things upstream, then you can submit
> updated definitions for the coordinate systems in Bugzilla and
> I will apply them.

I'll test the "sterea" more in next few days and will make a Bugzilla report 
if all is ok.

> I *think* I have a way of managing "overrides" for the
> autogenerated epsg file.
> Hmm, now that I look around, I don't know how I do this.
> Perhaps I never did implement an override mechanism in
> the generation code.
> Best regards,


More information about the Proj mailing list