[Proj] Roussilhe Projection

Mon Oct 24 03:34:52 EDT 2005

> Right, sterea is a very good match when compared to reference Transpol
> 1.1. I'd love to compare it to rouss too, if it is going to be ported to
> Frank's PROJ.4. Is it?

My version of rouss, compared to the Transpol testpoints.
Note that my version of rouss is libproj4's version, with the earlier
mentioned correction, incorporating m0.
x and y: Polish notation (northing, easting).
Number of significant decimals: unknown.

Zone 1
lat0=50d 37m 30s; lon0=21d 5m;
x0=5467000; y0=4637000; m0=0.9998; Krasowski

lat=52; lon=19;
y65,x65 = 4493939.52614385, 5621984.47469338
TRANSPOL  4493939.53053     5621984.46761
lat=52; lon=23;
y65,x65 = 4768617.47851932, 5621672.57554829
TRANSPOL  4768617.47513     5621672.56947
lat=50; lon=23;
y65,x65 = 4774385.80374708, 5399258.64246896
TRANSPOL  4774385.80471     5399258.64189
lat=50; lon=20;
y65,x65 = 4559343.33191274, 5398055.09480604
TRANSPOL  4559343.33174     5398055.09441

Zone 4
lat0=51d 40m 15s; lon0=16d 40m 20s;
x0=5627000; y0=3703000; m0=0.9998; Krasowski

lat=52; lon=15;
y65,x65 = 3588182.16721551, 5664935.33352499
TRANSPOL  3588182.16725     5664935.33351
lat=52; lon=17;
y65,x65 = 3725507.13249169, 5663668.48972936
TRANSPOL  3725507.13249     5663668.48971
lat=50; lon=17;
y65,x65 = 3726500.89605595, 5441200.96709125
TRANSPOL  3726500.89610     5441200.96695
lat=51; lon=15;
y65,x65 = 3585638.29537667, 5553716.83449556
TRANSPOL  3585638.29472     5553716.83370

> Oscar, what do you exactly mean saying "[errors corrected by OvV]"?
Errors in the original text in Geodeta Magazine
<http://www.atomnet.pl/~geodeta/2000/59text1.htm>
corrected by me, as completely accounted for in my email dated 2005-10-20
17:45