lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan McKinley <>
Subject Re: [spatial] Cartesian "Tiers" nomenclature
Date Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:49:24 GMT
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

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.


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  
> <> 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

View raw message