Re: [Geojson] RFC 7946 - composing geometry objects with "mixed" positions

There will be parsers that make assumptions about the consistency of
dimensions. So while not strictly invalid, you'll likely sacrifice
interoperability if you plan to share data with inconsistent dimensions.

Tim

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:59 AM Erik Wilde <erik.wilde@dret.net> wrote:

> hello udo.
>
> On 2017-04-25 14:31, Udo Schochtert wrote:
> > my question is if the following MultiPoint (composed by"mixed"
> > positions) would be valid as well
> >
> > {
> >   "type": "MultiPoint",
> >   "coordinates": [
> >     [100.0, 0.0],
> >     [101.0, 1.0, 1.0]
> >   ]
> > }
> >
> > that would also apply to other geometries composed by"mixed" positions
> > as well (e.g. LineString, Polygon, etc.). correct?
>
> that's a good question. afaict, there is nothing in the spec language
> that keeps you from doing this. however, the semantics are unspecified.
> it is not clear if positions without elevations should have elevation
> zero or "inherit" the elevation of the last elevation-labeled position.
> my suggestion would be to not use this "mixed model", but that's just my
> personal opinion.
>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
>
> --
> erik wilde | mailto:erik.wilde@dret.net |
>             | http://dret.net/netdret    |
>             | http://twitter.com/dret    |
>
> _______________________________________________
> GeoJSON mailing list
> GeoJSON@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geojson
>