Comments on: Google Projection: 900913

By: SRIDs, GeoDjango, PostGIS, and me « nelsonslog

SRIDs, GeoDjango, PostGIS, and me « nelsonslog — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 01:28:00 +0000

[...] 900913: Google Maps’ modified Mercator. (It spells “google” in l33t). [...]

By: Suprageography » Blog Archive » Spherical Mercator Maps in OpenLayers 2.8

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:36:13 +0000

[...] here at UCL have taken to calling WebMercator, and is also known as EPSG:900913 (the numbers representing Google in l33t-speak…) - it has now also been assigned an official EPSG number of 4375. Yahoo and [...]

By: crschmidt

crschmidt — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:11:42 +0000

http://spatialreference.org/ref/epsg/62556405/ is an EPSG code outside of that range. It is deprecated, but still in the distributed EPSG database.

By: Justitia

Justitia — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:35:45 +0000

In addition, EPSG only use codes between 0 and 32767 (the equivalent of a positive signed short integer) any codes outside of this range are proprietary. Hence 900913!

By: Justitia

Justitia — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:31:23 +0000

EPSG has added a WGS 84 / Pseudo-Mercator Projection with a code of EPSG:3857 (See at http://www.epsg-registry.org/ )

They remark that “Uses spherical development of ellipsoidal coordinates. Relative to an ellipsoidal development errors of up to 800 metres in position and 0.7 percent in scale may arise. It is not a recognised geodetic system: see WGS 84 / World Mercator (CRS code 3395).”

EPSG had previously had this as a code of EPSG:3785 but this was deprecated under Change Request EPSG::2008.114 and so EPSG:3857 is now valid.

By: 900913

900913 — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:05:15 +0000

i think 900913 is great.
9-g
0-o
0-o
9-g
1-l
3-e

get it? 900913 is equal to google. THAT’S AMAZING ! =-)

By: paul mccullough

paul mccullough — Wed, 07 May 2008 16:57:31 +0000

Hey Chris,
Quick question…
RE the post gis insert statement - why is the srid == 96?
I was expecting 900913.
Thanks
Paul

By: Allan

Allan — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 13:42:16 +0000

I don’t think it would be a bad thing to have a non-EPSG authority for some set of neo-geography SRS’s. On the other hand, since you do have to worry about a number collision, it may be time to have name spaces or even URI instead of numbers. I think EPSG:4326, or even 4326 are valid URI forms. So is http://spatialreference.org/ref/user/6

By: David

David — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:25:52 +0000

5VV337!

By: Morten

Morten — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 07:05:32 +0000

Google in 1337 speak is 600613.
I think you should instead raise the concern with EPSG. The more people that pledge their case, the better chance there is that they will include it.