In order to make any to_subsurface() or from_subsurface() function to work seamlessly on every library that wants to implement them, we would need to determine a standard reference system on subsurface.
This way, if a given library A converts their data structures to a subsurface object, another library B can open it without having to worry about how A defines their coordinates.
After a brainstorming with @Leguark , we ended up in some conclusions:
subsurface should use a right-handed coordinate system with z axis point upwards and x and y axis as horizontal ones.- There will be no assumption on the direction of
x and y coordinates: they can either be pointing towards east and north, respectively, or towards southwest and southeast, respectively.
- Each library should manage their own coordinate conversions on their
to_subsurface() and from_subsurface() functions.
These choices are based on the default reference system in PyVista, which sounds very rational.
This means that we would keep a fairly easy way to plot subsurface objects in PyVista.
What do you think?
In order to make any
to_subsurface()orfrom_subsurface()function to work seamlessly on every library that wants to implement them, we would need to determine a standard reference system onsubsurface.This way, if a given library A converts their data structures to a
subsurfaceobject, another library B can open it without having to worry about how A defines their coordinates.After a brainstorming with @Leguark , we ended up in some conclusions:
subsurfaceshould use a right-handed coordinate system withzaxis point upwards andxandyaxis as horizontal ones.xandycoordinates: they can either be pointing towards east and north, respectively, or towards southwest and southeast, respectively.to_subsurface()andfrom_subsurface()functions.These choices are based on the default reference system in PyVista, which sounds very rational.
This means that we would keep a fairly easy way to plot
subsurfaceobjects in PyVista.What do you think?