Stefan Jaud

I see. Thank you for the explanations, @theoryshaw and @aothms . My comment above is thus resolved.

I don't think that using `IfcSite` is a good choice, since it isn't necessary to have one in the dataset. I propose to change to the *as calculated at the...

What do lat/long of IfcSite have to do with the TrueNorth of the context? These are independent from one another IMO.

Note: I'm coming from the perspective of "there is IFC documentation, how to interpret it - ambiguities need resolution" and not "I have this use case, where to find information...

Hi Bernhard, other files are very welcome! I think that this way others will be able to double-check their implementations accordingly. My comment was addressing the typos in your readme...

We're moving to the new repository: https://github.com/bSI-InfraRoom/IFC-infra-unit-test Please open a new pull request there and close this one.

Propose to add *EPSG:4326 with epoch 1984* to the documentation. It resolves disambiguity and most probably reflects what the original authors had in mind (see also *a historic summary* above).

> You will need a new IfcMapConversion per context. This is, well, not very good. Yes, you need a new `IfcMapConversion` per context, and I find this very good! Imagine...

Deprecation of `TrueNorth` +1

> the documentation needs updating: the sentence "If there is more ... " shall be deleted. Has somebody done this?