|
Re: census 2000 tiger 108th org2ogr errors: msg#00142gis.gdal.devel
Heitzso wrote: The files came from census 2000 108th congressional district tiger files Heitzso, The files in question have a version code of 1002 (October 2002) on the basis of which I classify them as being in Tiger 2002 format. Unfortunately, as you suggest, they are in fact in Tiger 2000 format and so things fail quite dramatically for some kinds of features, such as the FeatureIds, where the format differs in substantial ways. I am not exactly sure what to do about this. There are definately 2002 files produced in this version range so I am wondering if it is practical to determine the version only on the basis of the version code. It may end up that I need to inspect the RT5 record length or other similar "hacks" to determine the correct version code. Yuck. I have created a bug report, please feel free to add yourself to the cc: list. http://bugzilla.remotesensing.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400 I will discuss this with Mark Phillips and see if he has any advice. He did much of the recent work on OGR's TIGER/Line translator. Best regards, -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@xxxxxxxxx light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: census 2000 tiger 108th org2ogr errors: 00142, Mark Phillips |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: A Proposal and Request for Comments: 00142, Michael Graff |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: census 2000 tiger 108th org2ogr errorsi: 00142, Heitzso |
| Next by Thread: | Re: census 2000 tiger 108th org2ogr errors: 00142, Heitzso |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |