|Perlis cadaster plan sits spot on with Google Hybrid|
|Perlis cadaster map projection parameters|
|Perlis topographic map|
|Perlis topographic map projection parameters|
|Note how far they are apart|
|Enter the Export to new projection module|
|Configure the Export to new projection module|
|Sadly no effect|
Export to new projection module fails but why?
This test uses the Vector/Data Management Tool called "Export to new projection" and created a new topography layer by using the topographical plan then borrowing the map projection from the cadaster plan which already sits perfectly on site at the Google Hybrid yet did not turn out well. I am trying to diagnose why did it fail? Presently, the only answer I can come up with but I may be wrong is that the topographic map (here again, I am assuming) had its map projection roots base on the Geographic Coordinate System/Kertau (RSO) whereas the map project for the Cadaster plan was base on a different projection system category that is User Defined Coordinate System and they are not birds of a feather, unless of course, it can be done but that I simply do not know how-to. Rats! Asking around from my more experienced staff, I come to realize this RSO-Cassini thing is much more complex than I assume it would be which we hope migration to the GDM2000 map projection will resolve much of the outstanding issues. Funny thing is that when I referred to ArcGIS way, it appears their Data Management Tool method used is similar that is called a 'Project' module. This only makes it more intriguing. I was made to understand that the RSO-Cassini reprojection is a sequential step that has a hop, skip and jump step from RSO to WGS84 to Cassini and what I did was hop and jump which is a no-no. Still I think the user is bounded by the rules or parameters behind the scene set by what the software impose hence it may work with one software but may not with another although the procedure are the same but I am still wondering why working with the custom CRS inputting your preferred parameters based on one that works does not get you the result you seek unless of course the custom CRS setting behind the scene also needs "remapping" like what I did for my car's ECU.
|Firstly, cadaster plan with user defined coordinate system|
|Secondly saved as on RSO (Kertau) projection|
|Thirdly, RSO-ed layer saved as WGS84 projection|
|Lastly, WGS84-ed layer saved as cassini Perlis proejection|