On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Yeesian Ng <
ngye...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It depends on how friendly you expect the packages to be. Julia's support
> for GIS functionality is nowhere close to that of R's, but is in a good
> place if you're looking for just reader/writer packages.
>
> There has been a few attempts at wrapping GDAL so far, and I think
>
https://github.com/visr/GDAL.jl's is the most promising. It expects the user
> to be conversant with the GDAL Data Model, and to work with pointers/handles
> to them within Julia, and is meant for other packages (e.g.
>
https://github.com/yeesian/GDALUtils.jl) to build upon. These are still
> fairly alpha-stage packages, so see the tests for
> example-usage/documentation, and use them at your own risk/etc.
>
> Warnings aside, I think
https://github.com/visr/GDAL.jl does not shoehorn
> users into a single philosophy, and always allows upstream-packages/users
> the option of bypassing the wrapper/convenience functionality to access the
> raw C API (which may/may-not be a big deal for you at this point).
>
> The state of support for geographic projections in Julia is also improving,
> and I'd recommend
https://github.com/FugroRoames/Proj4.jl and
>
https://github.com/awbsmith/Geodesy.jl if you're looking for libraries.
Just a note of warning here - Geodesy is in a state of flux right now,
and after several prototypes we're still not entirely sure what the
high level interface should look like. The main sticking point is
that we'd like to carry CRS information in the point types, but this
can give the API a very intrusive/heavyweight feeling, and in some
circumstances results in an explosion of distinct point types. I've
promised to give a talk about it at juliacon 2016 though, so I guess
that means we'll have to get our act together by then!
The upshot is that the Geodesy API is likely to change a lot in the
near term. It will probably go somewhat in the direction of
awbsmith/Geodesy.jl, but I'm hoping for something a bit more
lightweight. Finding the "right" abstractions here is turning out to
be a rather tricky design problem.
The Proj4.jl package is likely to stay similar to what it is now as
it's mostly just a wrapper around the proj.4 C API. Some of the high
level API will probably change when we figure out how Geodesy.jl and
CoordinateTransformations.jl are going to look.
Cheers,
~Chris