Update of "PROJ.6"
Not logged in

Many hyperlinks are disabled.
Use anonymous login to enable hyperlinks.

Overview

Artifact ID: 77c182367a4de26550f848eb57fecba3c67c4139
Page Name:PROJ.6
Date: 2019-04-16 14:20:21
Original User: sandro
Parent: 72fd04f6a5ea86a446fe4e7fcd46f514853de30d (diff)
Next 867805dc96b44c47401e129bd153ecd8cfa77312
Content

back



Introduction

PROJ is a well-known library for performing conversions between cartographic projections.
It's universally supported by almost all open source GIS-oriented applications and packages, so there is no need to waste time in futher presentations.
We just need a bit of history to fully understand the current state-of-the-art:

Timeline:
Short conclusion: the fourth version of PROJ (aka PROJ.4) lasted for about two decades, a very uncommon situation.
And a full generation of developers and users become sincerly convinced that PROJ.4 was the real name of the library.

The revolution comes

Timeline:
Note: the whole transition implies many relevant changes, so that a deeply revised API will be required. In other words, the old PROJ.4 and the new PROJ.7 will support two different APIs, thus abruptly breaking cross-version compatibility.
This is an umpleasant new, because it practically means that all software modules depending on PROJ (this including SpatiaLite) will require a not at all trivial rewrite in order to fulfill the new API requirements.
But when you consider that's the first time in its very long life that PROJ requires an extra effrot in order to introduce so many useful innovations, this unexpected API breakage looks fully justified and absolutely reasonable.

More details about the API breakage:

What's new in PROJ.6

Old versions of PROJ (including PROJ.4) required to define each CRS (Coordinate Reference System) by a corresponding proj-string. The following table exemplifies the case of few CRSes:

SRIDCRS Nameproj-string
3003Monte Mario / Italy zone 1 +proj=tmerc +lat_0=0 +lon_0=9 +k=0.9996 +x_0=1500000 +y_0=0 +ellps=intl +towgs84=-104.1,-49.1,-9.9,0.971,-2.917,0.714,-11.68 +units=m +no_defs
4326WGS 84 +proj=longlat +datum=WGS84 +no_defs
32632WGS 84 / UTM zone 32N +proj=utm +zone=32 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs


New versions of PROJ (starting since PROJ.6) still continue to support the old proj-strings, but the preferred notation for defining any CRS is now conformant to the ISO-19111:2019 international standard
(OGC Abstract Specification Topic 2: “Referencing By Coordinates”).
The following table exemplifies the same CRSes as above in the ISO WKT notation:

SRID3003432632632
CRS NameMonte Mario / Italy zone 1WGS 84WGS 84 / UTM zone 32N
ISO-2018 WKT
PROJCRS["Monte Mario / Italy zone 1",
    BASEGEODCRS["Monte Mario",
        DATUM["Monte Mario",<br>
            ELLIPSOID["International 1924",6378388,297,
                LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]]],
        PRIMEM["Greenwich",0,
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433]]],
    CONVERSION["Italy zone 1",
        METHOD["Transverse Mercator",
            ID["EPSG",9807]],
        PARAMETER["Latitude of natural origin",0,
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433],
            ID["EPSG",8801]],
        PARAMETER["Longitude of natural origin",9,
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433],
            ID["EPSG",8802]],
        PARAMETER["Scale factor at natural origin",0.9996,
            SCALEUNIT["unity",1],
            ID["EPSG",8805]],
        PARAMETER["False easting",1500000,
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1],
            ID["EPSG",8806]],
        PARAMETER["False northing",0,
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1],
            ID["EPSG",8807]]],
    CS[Cartesian,2],
        AXIS["easting (X)",east,
            ORDER[1],
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]],
        AXIS["northing (Y)",north,
            ORDER[2],<br>
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]],
    AREA["Italy - west of 12°E"],
    BBOX[36.53,5.94,47.04,12],
    ID["EPSG",3003]]
GEODCRS["WGS 84",
    DATUM["World Geodetic System 1984",
        ELLIPSOID["WGS 84",6378137,298.257223563,
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]]],
    PRIMEM["Greenwich",0,
        ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433]],
    CS[ellipsoidal,2],
        AXIS["geodetic latitude (Lat)",north,
            ORDER[1],
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433]],
        AXIS["geodetic longitude (Lon)",east,
            ORDER[2],
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433]],
    AREA["World"],
    BBOX[-90,-180,90,180],
    ID["EPSG",4326]]
PROJCRS["WGS 84 / UTM zone 32N",
    BASEGEODCRS["WGS 84",
        DATUM["World Geodetic System 1984",
            ELLIPSOID["WGS 84",6378137,298.257223563,
                LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]]],
        PRIMEM["Greenwich",0,
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433]]],
    CONVERSION["UTM zone 32N",
        METHOD["Transverse Mercator",
            ID["EPSG",9807]],
        PARAMETER["Latitude of natural origin",0,
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433],
            ID["EPSG",8801]],
        PARAMETER["Longitude of natural origin",9,
            ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433],
            ID["EPSG",8802]],
        PARAMETER["Scale factor at natural origin",0.9996,
            SCALEUNIT["unity",1],
            ID["EPSG",8805]],
        PARAMETER["False easting",500000,
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1],
            ID["EPSG",8806]],
        PARAMETER["False northing",0,
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1],
            ID["EPSG",8807]]],
    CS[Cartesian,2],
        AXIS["(E)",east,
            ORDER[1],
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]],
        AXIS["(N)",north,
            ORDER[2],
            LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]],
    AREA["World - N hemisphere - 6°E to 12°E - by country"],
    BBOX[0,6,84,12],
    ID["EPSG",32632]]


As you can easily notice, the two notations are profoundly different. The old old proj-string is extremely concise and rough, whilst the new ISO-WKT is verbose but exhaustive, detailed and precise.
There is no possible match: ISO-KWT is clearly superior and more sophisticated under any possible aspect.
Not at all surprisingly, coordinate transformations based on ISO-WKT definitions (instead of proj-strings) are usually expected to be more accurate.

And that's not all; the old proj-strings weren't formally defined by any standard, and only PROJ, GDAL and few other FLOSS / GFOSS implementations could understand them.
At the opposite, the new ISO-WKT is formally defined by an international standard, and many free and proprietary implementations could understand them.

There is a second astonishing improvement supported by PROJ.6, that are transformation pipelines.
When using a pipeline you can freely define any complex geodetic transformation by chaining together many elementary steps such as conversion, transformation, projection, axis swap and so on.
A pipeline is conceptually similar to a UNIX shell script, with a dataflow regularly proceding forward from step to step.
The following is a practial example of a pipeline corresponding to a transformation from NAD27 to NAD83,
+proj=pipeline 
+step +proj=axisswap +order=2,1 
+step +proj=unitconvert +xy_in=deg +xy_out=rad 
+step +proj=hgridshift +grids=conus 
+step +proj=unitconvert +xy_in=rad +xy_out=deg 
+step +proj=axisswap +order=2,1
In order to learn more about the many interesting cool new features supported by PROJ.6 please consult the original documentation


back