Brian: I wonder what is pragmatic (or do you mean practical?) about the below exercise. Pragmatics is another thing...proposed by a practicing geodesist (CS Peirce) by the way...aimed at truth testing.
And then I agree with Paul (see message 2 below), that categorization is, uh, rather important to knowledge. I recommend George Lakoff's "Women, fire and dangerous things" on the subject (if bored, skip to chapter 16). By the ways categories do not need to be fixed, but can also be graded. The Pope may not be a bachelor if a fixed definition is used, however his bachelorness can be quite high all the same :-) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:17:23 -0400 From: Brian Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Geowanking] pragmatic exercise To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed as a pragmatic exercise allow me to start with a map and end with a database schema. begin with a Fuller projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuller_projection) an icosahedral framework of 20 triangular areas (actually tetrahedra to the center - but we'll leave that out for now). Each triangular area is designated a Major Triad. Each Major Triad is subdivided ** by the same base as the original sphere ** into 400 Minor Triads (20^2). If the edge of a Major Triad is 8,000 km the edges of the Minor Triads are 400 km. Major Triads are designated with characters A through T; Minor Triads are designated AA through TT. Minor Triads are further subdivided into Trixels (or whatever) again by the same base creating a recursive triangular mesh capable of defining unique triangular regions 2.5 m on edge with 13 characters. Forgive me as it may be apparent by now that I'm not a geographer. I'm an application engineer that builds wireless sensor networks and needs a place to store data based on sensor location - sometimes static - sometimes mobile. I've got networks in the US, Pacific islands, India and Europe. This Recursive Triangular Mesh is what I'm using to do it. The database schema is nothing more than a wiki with a directory structure that looks like "D/FH/KP/ET/SA/RO" - addressing a unique area of less than 3 square meters directly converted from a Lat/Long point. My other concern is the precision and accuracy of the location measuring instrument - how many digits does my GPS provide? It defines the size of the final Trixel. - Brian ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:30:48 -0700 From: "Paul Ramsey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] polarized light etc To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ah, you just want to discard all of Western thought back to Aristotle. And here I thought you were a wanker. (categorization) P On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:07 AM, stephen white <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 04/07/2008, at 5:24 PM, Will King wrote: >> So give us a sample problem, no waffle, Stephen and the pragmatists >> on geowanking will probably come up with a pretty good solution. > > > How can we organise all forms of captured information without > categorising? Voxels? Turing? Red dots? Layers? > > That problem has the pre-requisite that you agree that categorisation > damages information. > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [..cut] ______________________________________________ Michael Gould Dept. Information Systems (LSI) Universitat Jaume I, 12071 Castellón, Spain. email: gould (at) lsi.uji.es www.geoinfo.uji.es _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
