Right, NRQ is able to translate any requested range into the union
(OR) of brackets (from the trie) created during indexing.
Can spatial do the same thing, just with 2D instead of 1D? Ie,
reconstruct any expressible shape (created at query time) as the union
of some number of grids/tiers, at
Marvin Humphrey wrote:
[ Click on Package org.apache.lucene.spatial.tier ]
Lots of red text -- guess they're serious about this not being a stable API.
We put all that red in after realizing all the other issues existed -
lest someone think this was a polished, finished contrib. When we
Actually that's just with the DistanceQueryBuilder that needs the precision
boolean (wheither to do just a bounding box or also filter on radius),
the original name of the project was locallucene, to me local and spatial
are 2 completely different things.
- Local is a search from point x within
Hi Mike,
Right, NRQ is able to translate any requested range into the union
(OR) of brackets (from the trie) created during indexing.
Can spatial do the same thing, just with 2D instead of 1D? Ie,
reconstruct any expressible shape (created at query time) as the union
of some number of
Because of this the precision is limited for tiers, you filter the rest of
the docs. If the precision would be higher, the number of cart tiers
explodes at the corner of the BBOX.
Hmm, depends on the order of the search, if you use bestFit is should not
explode.
The strategy for bestFit is
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
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
I also know the name Quad Tree or Trie, but not sure, he it is really the same.
Uwe
Mit einem Mobiltelefon von Sony Ericsson gesendet
Originalnachricht
Von: Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org
Gesendet:
An: general@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: [spatial] Cartesian Tiers nomenclature
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.
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:31:14AM -0500, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
As some of you may know, I've been working pretty heavily on spatial stuff
lately.
Been watching from a distance, glad to see it. :)
One of the things that has bothered me for a while is the use of the
terminology: cartesian
On Dec 28, 2009, at 1:00 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
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.
If it hasn't been baked in yet, then +1. I do agree that it's
Grant Ingersoll wrote:
On Dec 28, 2009, at 1:00 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
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.
If it hasn't been baked in yet, then +1. I do agree
Most of the atmospheric/climate/earth scientists that I work with refer to
these tiers as grid boxes.
I think you¹ll 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
So Grant here's the deal behind the name.
Cartesian because it's a simple x.y coordinate system
Tier because there are multiple tiers, levels of resolution.
If you look at it closer:
- To programmers there's a quadtree implementation
- To web users who use maps these are grids / tiles.
- To GIS
On Dec 28, 2009, at 3:51 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
So Grant here's the deal behind the name.
Cartesian because it's a simple x.y coordinate system
Tier because there are multiple tiers, levels of resolution.
If you look at it closer:
- To programmers there's a quadtree implementation
-
Hmm, but when you say grid, to me that's just a bunch of regularly spaced
lines..
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.orgwrote:
On Dec 28, 2009, at 3:51 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
So Grant here's the deal behind the name.
Cartesian because it's a simple x.y
Hmm, depends, tiles indicate to me a direct correlation between the id and a
map tile, which will depend upon using the right projection
with the cartesian plotter
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.orgwrote:
On Dec 28, 2009, at 4:19 PM, patrick o'leary wrote:
So trying no to drag this out, the most frequent generic term used in GIS
software is SRID
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRID
Again this provides just a basic nomenclature for the high level element,
somewhat the blackbird of objects rather than the defining the magpie (sorry
for the CS 101
Hi Patrick,
Interesting. It seems like there is a precedent already in the Local Lucene
and Local SOLR packages that define CartesianTier as lingua franca.
Like I said in an earlier email it depends on who you talk to regarding the
preference of what to call these Tiles/Grids/Tiers, etc., and
Ah the language of math is the ultimate lingua franca -
Nice !
When you look at the coordinates entity from KML, ask why are the lat /
longs reversed to long/ lat?
Answer because the folks working on the display thought in terms of *display
not GIS*, the point is over Y degrees of longitude and
36 matches
Mail list logo
