Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add SeaFloor Altitude Modes #49

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add SeaFloor Altitude Modes #49

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

devHazz
Copy link

@devHazz devHazz commented Apr 10, 2023

As per the Google Dev Reference, Add SeaFloor Altitude Modes

@pjsier
Copy link
Member

pjsier commented Apr 11, 2023

Thanks for the PR! Could you say a little more about this? It looks like from the documentation you shared that this would only work inside of a namespaced gx:altitudeMode element, and not the base altitudeMode.

I'm seeing support for seaFloorAltitudeMode in the OGC specification here http://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/12-007r2/12-007r2.html#326, but having a better sense of your use case might help

@devHazz
Copy link
Author

devHazz commented Apr 11, 2023

From what I've seen by attempting to use the lib so far, it throws the correct InvalidAltitudeError so it seems to parse the gx prefix fine? Not sure if that's intentional? I'm using the lib for parsing airspace data from an Air Traffic Service source so it relies heavily on height based on sea floor.

@pjsier
Copy link
Member

pjsier commented Apr 20, 2023

Got it, thanks for checking that! This might dig into the internals of the quick-xml library, but would it be possible to write out any altitudes with SeaFloor as the altitude with a gx: prefix on altitudeMode? That seems like it could maximize compatibility, even if it results in some inconsistency

@devHazz
Copy link
Author

devHazz commented Apr 24, 2023

From the data I've been working with, they all utilise the gx: prefix so it seems that compatibility should be more than reasonable

@pjsier
Copy link
Member

pjsier commented Apr 24, 2023

@devHazz great! Let me know if I can help with looking into that or if there are any broader changes we would have to make

@devHazz
Copy link
Author

devHazz commented Jun 9, 2023

From more of the testing I've done, it seems my commit is perfectly working and ready for a merge. It seems to be compatible.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants