It's great that there's such a sudden burst of energy to improve
spatial in both Solr and Lucene!
Isn't this concept the same as trie (for Lucene's numeric fields),
but in 2D not 1D?
If so, I think tiles doesn't convey that they recursively
subdivide.
Also: why does this notion even need naming
On Dec 29, 2009, at 6:28 AM, Michael McCandless wrote:
It's great that there's such a sudden burst of energy to improve
spatial in both Solr and Lucene!
Isn't this concept the same as trie (for Lucene's numeric fields),
but in 2D not 1D?
If so, I think tiles doesn't convey that they
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=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+javalobby%2Ffrontpage+%28Javalobby+%2F+Java+Zone%29
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 08:54:21AM -0800, patrick o'leary wrote:
But at the same time, the rational behind finding a name that most folks are
familiar with, is kind of like sales / marketing talk
You probably mean that to be derogatory, but it's related and not in a bad
way. This is about
You probably mean that to be derogatory, but it's related and not in a bad
way. This is about effective communication, which marketing people
understand.
Hence the term spatial-luence, or as it was originally called locallucene-
We are discussing an internal component, where folks want to
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
patrick o'leary wrote:
CartesianTier's adequately describes what the design does- Layer one
cartesian coordinate system on top of another
So, you all agree that it is Cartesian and that it evokes the idea of
layers, but it's not a grid and it's not tiles; the original author is
very
On Dec 29, 2009, at 2:14 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
You probably mean that to be derogatory, but it's related and not in a bad
way. This is about effective communication, which marketing people
understand.
Hence the term spatial-luence, or as it was originally called locallucene-
We
But is that really worth breaking all the existing references to
this? What
value is that for the users?
Just to clarify... your concern is two fold:
1. No term is perfect, Cartesian Tier is as good as any, lets stick
with it.
2. There are already references to cartesian tiers (like this
No just that-
We are looking at this API as a web maps tile solution- which it isn't.
Spatial - lucene as it was originally proposed was meant to be a tool box of
solutions-
Where CartesianTiers was one of the tools, as was GeoHash, and anything else
that others wanted to contribute.
Now we're
On Dec 29, 2009, at 4:27 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
My only issue is that I can't find a single reference to that phrase
outside of Local Lucene whereas I can find lots of references to the concept
under names like: map tiles, map grids, spatial tiles, or just plain
tiles/grids.
That
Not really. The community has made a commitment to provide spatial
capabilities in Lucene/Solr. It's important the community provide
code/documentation that people can understand and easily find other
information about the concept.
Even if it's incorrect... I see, well it is Apache
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:29:47PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
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.
OK, here's the brainlog I recorded while trying to figure out how
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 03:55:22PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
I'll save conclusion #2 for a separate email.
Conclusion # 2
==
The concepts used in spatial contrib are easy -- much easier than I'd come to
assume, given how drawn out this conversation has gotten. (Projections are
Marvin, then by all means write your own sir
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.comwrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 03:55:22PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
I'll save conclusion #2 for a separate email.
Conclusion # 2
==
The concepts used in
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 04:54:06PM -0800, patrick o'leary wrote:
Marvin, then by all means write your own sir
Well, that's a possibility. Of course it would work with Lucy, not Lucene.
One of my motivations for studying contrib-spatial today was to understand how
you'd done things so that if
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
... but for this algorithm, different rasterization resolutions need not
proceed by powers-of-two.
Indeed - one way to further generalize would be to use something like
Lucene's trie-based Numeric field, but with a
17 matches
Mail list logo
