Even Rouault kirjoitti 22.11.2017 klo 15:11:
On mercredi 22 novembre 2017 14:38:55 CET Ari Jolma wrote:
> Even Rouault kirjoitti 21.11.2017 klo 16:06:
> > gdal_translate (actually GDALDatasetCopyWholeRaster()) uses the
> > INTERLEAVE=PIXEL/BAND metadata item of the IMAGE_STRUCTURE domain as a
On mercredi 22 novembre 2017 14:38:55 CET Ari Jolma wrote:
> Even Rouault kirjoitti 21.11.2017 klo 16:06:
> > gdal_translate (actually GDALDatasetCopyWholeRaster()) uses the
> > INTERLEAVE=PIXEL/BAND metadata item of the IMAGE_STRUCTURE domain as a
> > hint whether to read band by band or all bands
Even Rouault kirjoitti 21.11.2017 klo 16:06:
gdal_translate (actually GDALDatasetCopyWholeRaster()) uses the
INTERLEAVE=PIXEL/BAND metadata item of the IMAGE_STRUCTURE domain as a
hint whether to read band by band or all bands together
So if you add the following, it should request all bands
Even Rouault kirjoitti 21.11.2017 klo 18:51:
> Somehow the user must be able to write
>
> dataset_1 = GDAL.Open("WCS:URL?coverage=coverage_a")
> dataset_2 = GDAL.Open("WCS:URL?coverage=coverage_a")
>
> So that for example dataset_1 is band c from coverage_a and dataset_2 is
> band d from t
> > And the following GetCoverage request succeeds and returns 3 bands
> >
> >
SERVICE=WCS&VERSION=1.0.0&REQUEST=GetCoverage&COVERAGE=multi&FORMAT=GEOT
IF
> > F_8&BBOX=15,48,16,49&bands=9,5,1&CRS=EPSG:4326&WIDTH=5&HEIGHT=5
> So it's a misconfiguration at 194.66.252.155
Yes, probably an issue wit
Even Rouault kirjoitti 21.11.2017 klo 16:06:
> and different time steps as bands.
My reading of the code and doc of the current driver is that time
steps are treated as subdatasets, and not bands.
Yes. My mistake.
> I'm not sure if there are many people
> using it since I believe the fu
On mardi 21 novembre 2017 12:23:31 CET Ari Jolma wrote:
> I'd like to get back to this topic a bit since I learned something from
> the standards that I believe was not discussed in the earlier discussion
>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2017-October/047464.html
>
> In WCS 1 the ran
I'd like to get back to this topic a bit since I learned something from
the standards that I believe was not discussed in the earlier discussion
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2017-October/047464.html
In WCS 1 the range of the data - remember the main conceptual division
to the dom
On 10/26/2017 07:25 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
>> More in general, we have multidimensional arrays where horizontal space
>
>> is not an x y image (GDAL raster band) but for instance a sequence of
>
>> feature geometries (e.g., in situ sensor data, or demographic data by
>
>> administrative regio
> > The main advantage of this is that it would have presumably no impact
> > on 2D-only drivers.
>
> I assume that would be very good from the point of view of actual
> feasibility of the whole project.
Yes, although the generic approach could probably be more doable by adding a
few
convenienc
Even Rouault kirjoitti 26.10.2017 klo 20:17:
>
> Would it be possible to keep X,Y as it is and add support for
> multidimensional data as an extension?
That could be indeed an option if we are sure that the 2 first
dimensions are X and Y, and we want only to slice higher dimensionnal
variab
> More in general, we have multidimensional arrays where horizontal
space
> is not an x y image (GDAL raster band) but for instance a sequence
of
> feature geometries (e.g., in situ sensor data, or demographic data
by
> administrative region, time, and age class).
I didn't grasp what you meant
On jeudi 26 octobre 2017 09:05:27 CEST Ari Jolma wrote:
> Even Rouault kirjoitti 25.10.2017 klo 22:22:
> > On mercredi 25 octobre 2017 14:42:54 CEST Ari Jolma wrote:
> > > I'd like to first know / decide what would we mean by a
> > >
> > > "multidimensional raster"?
> >
> > The current rasters ha
>
> I think band is a dimension in the implementation in GDAL
I disagree with that. There's clearly a GDALRasterBand object to model that.
> because for
> every (x,y,band) we give access to a pixel; if it were not a dimension
> but an attribute, we would for each pixel (x,y) give access to a re
On 10/26/2017 09:39 AM, Ari Jolma wrote:
> Edzer Pebesma kirjoitti 26.10.2017 klo 10:26:
>> More in general, we have multidimensional arrays where horizontal space
>> is not an x y image (GDAL raster band) but for instance a sequence of
>> feature geometries (e.g., in situ sensor data, or demogra
Edzer Pebesma kirjoitti 26.10.2017 klo 10:26:
More in general, we have multidimensional arrays where horizontal space
is not an x y image (GDAL raster band) but for instance a sequence of
feature geometries (e.g., in situ sensor data, or demographic data by
administrative region, time, and age cl
On 10/26/2017 08:05 AM, Ari Jolma wrote:
> Even Rouault kirjoitti 25.10.2017 klo 22:22:
>
>> On mercredi 25 octobre 2017 14:42:54 CEST Ari Jolma wrote:
>>
>> > I'd like to first know / decide what would we mean by a
>>
>> > "multidimensional raster"?
>>
>>
>>
>> The current rasters handled by
On 10/25/2017 09:22 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
> On mercredi 25 octobre 2017 14:42:54 CEST Ari Jolma wrote:
>
>> I'd like to first know / decide what would we mean by a
>
>> "multidimensional raster"?
>
>
>
> The current rasters handled by GDAL are already multidimensional, with
> the number o
Even Rouault kirjoitti 25.10.2017 klo 22:22:
On mercredi 25 octobre 2017 14:42:54 CEST Ari Jolma wrote:
> I'd like to first know / decide what would we mean by a
> "multidimensional raster"?
The current rasters handled by GDAL are already multidimensional
I was aiming at the 'multidimensio
On mercredi 25 octobre 2017 14:42:54 CEST Ari Jolma wrote:
> I'd like to first know / decide what would we mean by a
> "multidimensional raster"?
The current rasters handled by GDAL are already multidimensional, with the
number of
dimensions being fixed to 2, and being 2 horizontal dimensions (X
I'd like to first know / decide what would we mean by a
"multidimensional raster"?
What we now have as a raster is a dataset with one or more bands. The
bands represent the data dimension and thus there is one of those
(2D+1). Would we like to have more data dimensions? What Even sketches
bel
Hi
(top posting to clearly mark the start of a new thread)
> I too think that multidimensional raster support would be useful.
> Besides by drastically redesigning data structures, could we get there
> incrementally?
One difficulty is that there are 154 raster drivers that use the current data
I changed the subject, which was "WCS driver"; although it is still
relevant for the WCS driver, it's really about GDAL's abstraction.
On 10/24/2017 12:41 PM, Ari Jolma wrote:
> Even Rouault kirjoitti 24.10.2017 klo 13:28:
>>
>>
>>
>> > The netcdf files I looked at through the GDAL driver had ti
23 matches
Mail list logo
