lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: [spatial] Cartesian "Tiers" nomenclature
Date Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:30:09 GMT
Most of the atmospheric/climate/earth scientists that I work with refer to
these tiers as grid boxes.

I think you┬╣ll find different answers though, depending on who you ask. The
scientific community is a bit different that GIS/decision support folks...

Chris



On 12/28/09 9:49 AM, "Ryan McKinley" <ryantxu@gmail.com> wrote:

> I like "tile" best -- this has a direct mapping to common map caching
> systems (google/bing/tms/WorldWind)
> 
> 'Grid' is also good.  In OpenLayers, 'grid' is the parent, and tile
> based variations extend 'grid'.
> 
> "Tier" is interesting since it implies various levels, but i think
> using a more common term is better for a wider audience.
> 
> "Cartesian"?  The common tiling schemes are all cartesian (planar),
> however i think much of the same mechanics can be used to to tile
> spherical space.  Consider something like: HEALPix
> http://healpix.jpl.nasa.gov/
> 
> Uwe mentioned "Quad Tree or Trie" -- the big difference I see is that
> tiles or grids have sizes that are defined independent of the data.
> Quadtree, RTree, etc typically resize themselves as data is added.
> 
> I like "Tile", "TilePlotter", "FindBestTile", etc best.  Grid also
> works, but seems to refer to the whole system rather then the cell.
> 
> ryan
> 
> 
> On Dec 28, 2009, at 12:22 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote:
> 
>> I would extremely prefer a common well know name instead of Cartensian
>> tiers. While the API is still in flux changing the name is not that
>> much of a deal either. Either grid or tiles is fine for me though
>> while I would prefer the most common of the two - grid seems to be the
>> better choice though. Yet, should we stick to Cartesian?!
>> 
>> simon
>> 
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Grant Ingersoll
>> <gsingers@apache.org> wrote:
>>> As some of you may know, I've been working pretty heavily on
>>> spatial stuff lately.  One of the things that has bothered me for a
>>> while is the use of the terminology: cartesian tiers.  The thing
>>> is, I can't find any reference to such a thing in any place other
>>> than Local Lucene and Patrick's white paper on it.  Most GIS
>>> systems seem to either talk about grids or tiles when describing
>>> this capability.
>>> 
>>> Do you think it is worth a name change?  This is about to get baked
>>> into Solr and I would really prefer we choose names that the rest
>>> of the world seems to understand.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Grant
> 
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Mime
View raw message