Re: [udig-devel] missing prj files

[Adrian Custer <acuster@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hey,

We probably agree on almost everything.

If the layer to be added does not have any projection info and the map
has a projection we should:
 1) complain loudly
 2) allow users to presume the layer matches the map 'in this project'
 3) ?ADVANCED? Give users a way to write the matching projection info

Your example of tiff is more difficult. If we don't know how to anchor
the tiff, merely having projection info doesn't help. we'd need
orientation/extent or ... So again, we complain loudly but I can't think
of a reasonable default for applying the image 'in this project' you
know much more so perhaps have good ideas.

Of course, I don't get to do the work so I don't have much of a right to
this opinion. Good luck finding a user-friendly solution.

--adrian

On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:00 +0200, andrea antonello wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> 
> >> I want to take this to discussion once more.
> >>
> >> When a shapefile (or any other) doesn't have a prj file, sometimes odd
> >> things happen.
> >>
> >> Most esri users complain about the fact that they don't need prj files :)
> >> Apart of the hilarious thing, I think we should deal with the fact
> >> that many many people can have problems with this.
> >>
> >> My proposal is simple. When a missing projection information problem
> >> occurs, we ask the user if they want to have the projection file
> >> defined through the actual map projection information.
> >
> > What is this supposed to mean? If there's no projection info, then there
> > is no projection merely a 'dump' from file coordinate space to screen
> > coordinate space.
> >
> > Also imagine you are a user with no clue. I'd click "ok". Then someone
> > with a clue comes along and I've borked the file set for them (because I
> > added a bad .prj).
> 
> I can't agree on this after thousands of users finding it odd that
> maps don't show up and boring me with such requests. I don't say we
> have to follow my idea, but something has to be done. It is ok for me
> also to say "we don't want to show your map". But the user has to
> know.
> It is ok when you for example add a shapefile to a new map. A generic
> x,y system is taken and the map is visualized. This seems to make
> sense to me. But if the map already is in some sort of projection, and
> you add a file without prj info (believe me, there are many many)
> simply nothing happens, things are broken. And also note that people
> are absolutely not used to have a prj file for image files like tiffs
> and jpgs, this is a thing that I first saw in the udig project.
> I think a workaround should be there at least as a choice in the settings.
> 
> > So, unless you do this right, don't do it. Rule 0. Do no harm.
> 
> Agreed, but as it is now, it is no good.
> 
> Andrea
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > --adrian
> >
> >>
> >> What do you think, would that be feasible/make sense?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Andrea
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> >> http://udig.refractions.net
> >> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> > http://udig.refractions.net
> > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >
> _______________________________________________
> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> http://udig.refractions.net
> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel