This is insufficient information - The format for these coordinates is needed. Was the table (created 2004-09-22[1], deleted 2005-07-15[2]) wrong? Has this standard been superseded? As is, this article resembles a stub.

NeoAmsterdam 07:46, 2005 July 25 (UTC)

I agreed. I've supplied recent updates and details. Now it's no longer stub, is it?

Aprasinos (talk) 04:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But why did you delete the format table http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ISO_6709&diff=next&oldid=448922755? ChemTerm (talk) 21:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Annexes[edit]

Currently only D, F, H are shown. Could the others be added, even with only very little content, so readers see what is in the standard? ChemTerm (talk) 15:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ISO 6709. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added ((dead link)) tag to http://www.isotc211.org/2006/gpl
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111009145601/http://www.xyz.au.com/members/intelligence/pdf_files/ISO_FDIS_6709.pdf to http://www.xyz.au.com/members/intelligence/pdf_files/ISO_FDIS_6709.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Decimal degrees into ISO 6709[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

consensus not to merge. Klbrain (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

subset, superset fgnievinski (talk) 04:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – ISO 6709 may have incorporated the definition of decimal degrees, but the concept itself is general, exists independently of any international standards, and presumably predates ISO itself by quite a while. The current two-word proposal isn't particularly clear or convincing either. --Deeday-UK (talk) 13:42, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – While the ISO 6709 format for decimal degrees is a subset of ISO 6709, decimal degrees as a general concept (the topic of this article) is not, as Deeday-UK summarized well above. The concept of decimal degrees is a decimal fraction notation of angular degrees as applied to geographic coordinates, all of which are properly linked in the header per Wikipedia convention for that sort of relationship between concepts. The link to ISO 6709 belongs where it is now: in the See also section. -- Benjwgarner (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.