Must try and get back to work some time today.. So let me keep this brief
> If a "single cartesian tier" is "of limited use", why do you have a class > called "CartesianTier" at all? > > A bit is useless on it's own- A collection of bits allows you to do something. Why not a CartesianSet ? Because lucene is the set holder - That is the point of the index In fact there isn't a CartesianTier class, there is a CartesianTierPlotter class that returns a double as the coordinate from a getBoxId method. This allows it to be used outside of lucene if wanted. And in fact several folks do use it outside of lucene. > > > I would like to minimize the effort it takes to learn your tool. Good > class > names make that easier. There are 3 simple parts to this 1) Something to plot latitudes / longitudes based on a projection -- CartesianTierPlotter 2) A projection method (standard GIS terminology) -- IProjector 3) A way to search it -- For lucene this is the DistanceQueryBuilder I can't see how it's much simpler, if you don't want to dig into GIS, then it's all there neatly wrapped up. On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com>wrote: > 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 alternative, I'm just trying to understand what the > class does. > > Obviously I can go browse the JavaDocs and read the source code, and I will > eventually. 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. For the moment, though, I'm your trainee test case. Use > the > places where I'm confused to help you refine your API. (; Or to confirm to > yourself that it is perfect already. ;) > > > It's not a grid system, grids describe the bounding lines - where a point > is > > x,y : x1,y1, the intersection of 2 grid lines. > > I don't fully understand what you mean, but I think I disagree. It's > common > to overlay two "grids" of differing resolutions on top of each other. So > if a > "tier" is a zoom level, it seems to me that the word "grid" conveys that > same > concept pretty well. > > > Cartesian Tiles ? again a web mapping concept ... that's dropping the > > concept of tiers. > > Yes, I think the word "tile" suggests a single rectangular cell. But it's > common to rasterize a surface into multiple tile sets at different zoom > levels and then search on tiles as terms. > > Coming at this from a "web guy" perspective, I figured we were talking > about > something like that -- and *not* bounding boxes a la R-trees. > > > A single cartesian tier on it's own is of limited use. > > Interesting. I guess a zoom level without any geographical data isn't > useful, > but it still seems like something important that could be encapsulated > within > an object. In fact that's exactly what the name "CartesianTier" seemed to > suggest, since it's singular. > > If a "single cartesian tier" is "of limited use", why do you have a class > called "CartesianTier" at all? > > > What effort do you have down the road, and how does the name of it create > > problems for you? > > I have to learn how to use your tool, obviously. Presumably you want me to > use your tool, too, or you wouldn't have published it. > > I would like to minimize the effort it takes to learn your tool. Good > class > names make that easier. > > > If I were calling this PatrickGeoSolutions or MagicalGeoStuff then I > would > > understand the problem, What I'm doing is calling it by what it's doing > > generating a Cartesian Tiered system > > All these messages have gone by and I *still* don't understand what a > CartesianTier is. I'm artificially preserving my ignorance by avoiding the > JavaDocs and source code, but IMO, I ought to have grokked that by now. Or > you can blame the user... > > > But is that really worth breaking all the existing references to this? > What > > value is that for the users? > > Breaking all the references is obviously a negative. You only do such a > thing > when the gains outweigh the costs. > > Marvin Humphrey > >
