From general-return-1895-apmail-lucene-general-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Mon Dec 28 17:23:32 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 54083 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2009 17:23:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Dec 2009 17:23:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 62292 invoked by uid 500); 28 Dec 2009 17:23:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 62234 invoked by uid 500); 28 Dec 2009 17:23:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 62224 invoked by uid 99); 28 Dec 2009 17:23:31 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:23:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of simon.willnauer@googlemail.com designates 209.85.220.210 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.210] (HELO mail-fx0-f210.google.com) (209.85.220.210) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:23:20 +0000 Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so9484532fxm.5 for ; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:22:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=HExBXd/AUVrSxcL+Y7CSWWCviybpO2eRBIEVml0tQJg=; b=pi2VTXnIHqjB5gP7tu+uzWIenlwFu3B830ki+Jr1fsTAGOSIng85CCiIT4qK6ul4le fO+h5HUgMe8TVWoN/sbl7Z18S0gFytLlSyLPenfeEbiN3syH22IXllEC339NdotF9/2P 7mSVztsA4ZA4VlvZtuMB5dgZQgMoaWijnVJts= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=XOFTe0egINOlvHT/TRYdPVPFr1JEo16/h09l1pIj0b1nGnb2bmd+AALAjkqGRqjxY5 H2BIuY9mNovI9bhsyy50cDBYRDXNIwJpDXnmBnKiN6AoM70xSp8BDD72kcMM6wosZ6+B Fj8KGBT7uHrwduHDRPvaKmmc+1KAJK6PcReMA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.238.75 with SMTP id m11mr1658289hbp.8.1262020978991; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:22:58 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: simon.willnauer@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:22:58 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [spatial] Cartesian "Tiers" nomenclature From: Simon Willnauer To: general@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 wrot= e: > As some of you may know, I've been working pretty heavily on spatial stuf= f lately. =C2=A0One of the things that has bothered me for a while is the u= se of the terminology: cartesian tiers. =C2=A0The thing is, I can't find an= y reference to such a thing in any place other than Local Lucene and Patric= k's white paper on it. =C2=A0Most GIS systems seem to either talk about gri= ds or tiles when describing this capability. > > Do you think it is worth a name change? =C2=A0This is about to get baked = into Solr and I would really prefer we choose names that the rest of the wo= rld seems to understand. > > Thanks, > Grant