lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "patrick o'leary" <pj...@pjaol.com>
Subject Re: [spatial] Cartesian "Tiers" nomenclature
Date Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:54:21 GMT
>
> Like I said earlier, they are all self referential


So are all references to lucene- but then again
general@inverted_index_and_vector_space_model_library.com would not have as
many subscribers-



> is valuable in that some people have already been trained on it
>

It's not just training
Cartesian - an X,Y coordinate system based on the ideology of Descartes.
Tier - one of two or more layers one atop another

That's where this comes from, it's not made-ie-up-ie.

It's not about a standard, b/c as you say it doesn't exist.  It's about what
> most people are going to be familiar with.


There be dragons !
Cathode Ray Tubes => thingie with the lights and the moving images

When standards don't exist,  intelligence is not gained but a collective
lack of knowledge, it's gained by someone pointing out the first step, and
having others
succeed from there.

I don't expect spatial / local lucene to be the standard, just a mere
stepping stone.
But at the same time, the rational behind finding a name that most folks are
familiar with, is kind of like sales / marketing talk....
This is open source, not a commercial entity that needs to have features
that can fit on a brochure.





On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org>wrote:

>
> On Dec 29, 2009, at 2:49 AM, patrick o'leary wrote:
> > Doc's about it exist on gissearch.com
> > dzone are doing articles on it
> >
> http://java.dzone.com/articles/spatial-search-hibernate?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+javalobby%2Ffrontpage+%28Javalobby+%2F+Java+Zone%29
> >
> > Locallucene in google has over 8,000 results
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=locallucene
> >
> > Localsolr has over 4,000 results
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=localsolr
> >
>
> Like I said earlier, they are all self referential.  Find me a link that
> mentions Cartesian Tier that isn't also talking about Local Lucene/Solr.
>  That, of course, is valuable in that some people have already been trained
> on it.   However, now that spatial is a part of Lucene/Solr, I think it's
> valuable to make sure we are using the terminology that most people are
> familiar with, not just those who have used LocalLucene/Solr.
>
> > I've seen and help with installations all over the place, heck even
> codehaus
> > use it, as do folks on github with geonames db.
> > I see named it mathematically & scientifically correct, and  gaining
> enough
> > traction and popularity to start becoming part of the standard, not just
> > duplicating one.
>
> But aren't they calling it that b/c LocalLucene called it that?  Not saying
> that makes it wrong, I just want to call it what the majority of other
> people call it so that we can take advantage of and attract more people to
> contribute and maintain it.  Perhaps there is no standard, which makes it
> moot, but the fact that I've seen a number of people call it tiles or grids
> at much larger sites than Lucene makes me think those are better names, not
> too mention nearly everyone else on this thread.
>
>
> >
> > I can't honestly see how a refactoring is bringing anything positive to
> > this, when there isn't a good standard out there yet.
> >
>
> It's not about a standard, b/c as you say it doesn't exist.  It's about
> what most people are going to be familiar with.
>
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
> > chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Patrick,
> >>
> >> Interesting. It seems like there is a precedent already in the Local
> Lucene
> >> and Local SOLR packages that define "CartesianTier" as lingua franca.
> >>
> >> Like I said in an earlier email it depends on who you talk to regarding
> the
> >> preference of what to call these Tiles/Grids/Tiers, etc., and that seems
> to
> >> be further evidenced by your research.
> >>
> >> I for one donĀ¹t really have a preference but precedent matters to me and
> if
> >> Tiers have been used to date then there should be strong consideration
> to
> >> use that nomenclature and +1 from me.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> On 12/28/09 9:25 PM, "patrick o'leary" <pjaol@pjaol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> So trying no to drag this out, the most frequent generic term used in
> GIS
> >>> software is SRID
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRID
> >>>
> >>> Again this provides just a basic nomenclature for the high level
> element,
> >>> somewhat the blackbird of objects rather than the defining the magpie
> >> (sorry
> >>> for the CS 101 reference)
> >>>
> >>> But it should show that every implementation is unique in some format.
> >>> Perhaps as unique as CartesianTier's ( sorry Ted ! )
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:26 PM, patrick o'leary <pjaol@pjaol.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hmm, depends, tiles indicate to me a direct correlation between the
id
> >> and
> >>>> a map tile, which will depend upon using the right projection
> >>>> with the cartesian plotter
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Dec 28, 2009, at 4:19 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hmm, but when you say grid, to me that's just a bunch of regularly
> >>>>> spaced
> >>>>>> lines..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yeah, I hear you.  I chose spatial tiles for the Solr patch, but
> >> spatial
> >>>>> grid would work too.  Or map tiles/map grids.  That anchors it into
> the
> >>>>> spatial world, since we're calling Lucene's spatial contrib/spatial
> and
> >>>>> Solr's Solr Spatial.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Grant Ingersoll <
> gsingers@apache.org
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 28, 2009, at 3:51 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So Grant here's the deal behind the name.
> >>>>>>>> Cartesian because it's a simple x.y coordinate system
> >>>>>>>> Tier because there are multiple tiers, levels of resolution.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If you look at it closer:
> >>>>>>>> - To programmers there's a quadtree implementation
> >>>>>>>> - To web users who use maps these are grids / tiles.
> >>>>>>>> - To GIS experts this is a form of multi-resolution
raster-ing.
> >>>>>>>> - To astrophysicists these are tiers.
> >>>>>>>> - To the MS folks I've talked to they have quad something
or
> other.
> >>>>>>>> - To math folks Cartesian levels makes sense.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Can't make all the people happy all the time,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Right, but as far as I can tell (and I've only done, say
an hour of
> >>>>>>> research), I can't find anyone who calls them Cartesian
Tiers other
> >>>>> than us.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Personally, I think web users are the largest group (after
all,
> >> aren't
> >>>>> we
> >>>>>>> all web users?) out there and therefore will be the most
familiar
> >> with
> >>>>>>> either grid or tile.  FWIW, I have tentatively called the
Solr
> >>>>> FieldType to
> >>>>>>> support this "SpatialTileField" as in it represents a tile
in the
> >>>>> spatial
> >>>>>>> sense.  I'd be fine with SpatialGridField as well (GridField
seems
> a
> >>>>> bit too
> >>>>>>> generic).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> >> Senior Computer Scientist
> >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> >> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> >> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> >> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/<http://sunset.usc.edu/%7Emattmann/>
> <http://sunset.usc.edu/%7Emattmann/>
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/
>
> Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene:
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message