[talk-ph] recommended csv format

[Wayne Manuel]

Personally, I prefer lat-long. Easier to tell people that it should be
alphabetical. And that at least in the PHL, the smaller number comes before
the bigger number.

Also, when copying latitude longitude from Google Maps urls (the ll
parameter), it's lat long.

When you want to quickly check where your lat longs are, you can just paste
it into the Google Maps search box as lat,long




Wayne Manuel


On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Rally de Leon <ralleon at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Which is the more common / preferred format for csv
> lat,long,name or long,lat,name? and why do you prefer one over the other?
> (eg. less hassle, less clicks to import csv to common GIS softwares)
>
> If I am to recommend to ordinary people a free conversion utility, which
> one? (my 2 preferred utility have different csv format)
>
> If i use "gpsbabel's" generic (Comma separated values) option (eg. kml to
> csv conversion)---> gpsbabel -w -i kml -f filename.kml -o csv -F
> filename.csv
> csv will be in this order---> lat,long,name
>
> If i use another easy-to-use/free/multi-platform "KMLCSV" (from
> http://choonchernlim.com/kmlcsv/ )
> kml to csv conversion will give you---> long,lat,name
>
> KMLCSV is very easy to use and allows ordinary people to view the POI's on
> built-in google maps for quick verification. easy to install, easy to
> distribute, virtually idiot-proof.
>
> GPSBabel is universal, has gui and  command line, but has too many
> option-buttons that can be confusing for ordinary user.
>
> or is there a way gpsbabel can convert (kml to csv) or (osm to csv) in
> long,lat,name csv format?
>
> Thanks,
> Rally
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/attachments/20130919/1e4b4e9a/attachment.html>