If I read your question in the same context as your previous one, the difference between GDA94 and WGS84 seems to be the underlying concern.
(Sorry if I am mistaken.)
These two ellipsoids are defined as follows:
WGS84
Ellipsoid: WGS84
Semi-major axis (a): 6378137.0 meters
Inverse of flattening (1/f or rf): 298.257223563
GDA94
Ellipsoid: GRS80
Semi-major axis (a): 6378137.0 meters
Inverse of flattening (1/f or rf): 298.257222101
You will see their semi-major axis are the same, while flattening values are slightly different.
To see the impact of flattening, let's calculate semi-minor axis (N-S axis) (b)
using equation f=(a-b)/a
.
a <- 6378137.0
rf_wgs84 <- 298.257223563 # inverse f of WGS84
rf_grs80 <- 298.257222101 # inverse f of GRS80
# calculate semi-minor axis (b)
options(digits = 15)
(b_wgs84 <- a * (1 - 1/rf_wgs84)) # b_wgs84= 6356752.31424518 meters
(b_grs80 <- a * (1 - 1/rf_grs80)) # b_grs80= 6356752.31414036 meters
(Above example was done by R, but you can use any software to calculate b=a*(1-1/rf)
)
The difference between WGS84 (b_wgs84 in the above calculation) and GRS80 (b_grs80) is about 0.1 millimeters, for semi-minor axis. Given semi-major axis does not have such digit-accuracy, I tend to ignore their difference.
To me, it seems OK as is, to view the maps. For detailed analysis and such, please follow other answers.