lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: [spatial] Cartesian "Tiers" nomenclature
Date Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:29:47 GMT
patrick o'leary:

> CartesianTier's adequately describes what the design does- Layer one
> cartesian coordinate system on top of another....

So CartesianTier objects actually represent *multiple* tiers?  

Would "CartesianTierSet" be more accurate, albeit cumbersome?  I'm not
suggesting that as an alternative, I'm just trying to understand what the
class does.

Obviously I can go browse the JavaDocs and read the source code, and I will
eventually.  In Lucyland, we've adopted a tradition of recording "brainlogs"
while browsing unfamiliar documentation as a form of UI testing -- I'll do one
of those later.  For the moment, though, I'm your trainee test case.  Use the
places where I'm confused to help you refine your API.  (; Or to confirm to
yourself that it is perfect already. ;)

> It's not a grid system, grids describe the bounding lines - where a point is
> x,y : x1,y1, the intersection of 2 grid lines.

I don't fully understand what you mean, but I think I disagree.  It's common
to overlay two "grids" of differing resolutions on top of each other.  So if a
"tier" is a zoom level, it seems to me that the word "grid" conveys that same
concept pretty well.

> Cartesian Tiles ? again a web mapping concept ... that's dropping the
> concept of tiers.

Yes, I think the word "tile" suggests a single rectangular cell.  But it's
common to rasterize a surface into multiple tile sets at different zoom
levels and then search on tiles as terms.

Coming at this from a "web guy" perspective, I figured we were talking about
something like that -- and *not* bounding boxes a la R-trees.

> A single cartesian tier on it's own is of limited use.

Interesting.  I guess a zoom level without any geographical data isn't useful,
but it still seems like something important that could be encapsulated within
an object.  In fact that's exactly what the name "CartesianTier" seemed to
suggest, since it's singular.

If a "single cartesian tier" is "of limited use", why do you have a class
called "CartesianTier" at all?

> What effort do you have down the road, and how does the name of it create
> problems for you?

I have to learn how to use your tool, obviously.  Presumably you want me to
use your tool, too, or you wouldn't have published it.

I would like to minimize the effort it takes to learn your tool.  Good class
names make that easier.

> If I were calling this PatrickGeoSolutions or MagicalGeoStuff then I would
> understand the problem, What I'm doing is calling it by what it's doing
> generating a Cartesian Tiered system

All these messages have gone by and I *still* don't understand what a
CartesianTier is.  I'm artificially preserving my ignorance by avoiding the
JavaDocs and source code, but IMO, I ought to have grokked that by now.  Or
you can blame the user...

> But is that really worth breaking all the existing references to this? What
> value is that for the users?

Breaking all the references is obviously a negative.  You only do such a thing
when the gains outweigh the costs.

Marvin Humphrey

View raw message