Looks like I've missed the most interesting part while I was visiting a
customer :-)
John Denker wrote:
> As always, it is nicer to track the authoritative data, rather
> than forking it.
In some way our elevation/height (for published obstacles/obstructions)
data has always to be some sort of a 'fork' for several reasons.
Probably the most obvious one is being the fact that different
authorities are having different habits of specifying the highest
spots.
Some authorities are adding 500 ft clearance to the physical top of an
obstacle for their published obstacle elevation, some don't .... even
though a human definition of the highest spot would be pretty
unambiguous, things are getting rather complicated after passing
'authoritative' processing :-)
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gaining the trust of online customers is vital for the success of any company
that requires sensitive data to be transmitted over the Web. Learn how to
best implement a security strategy that keeps consumers' information secure
and instills the confidence they need to proceed with transactions.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
