Hi together, I've thought now long about this (maybe too long ;)) and I'll leave it as it is. The problem with "geometry"-node is that it refers to edgeState.fetchWayGeometry and we can get tower node geometry from this method too which might be confusing. The problem with "junction"-node is that end-standing nodes (in blind alleys) are no junctions.
And so, I've just updated the documentation here: https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/docs/core/low-level-api.md Regards, Peter On 02.12.2014 09:20, Peter wrote: > Thank you all for your input! > > > > in GI science we speak of 'vertices' for pillars and just 'nodes' or > 'junctions' for that what you know as tower nodes. > > Vertices vs. nodes is not a choice as one uses 'nodes' in graph theory > but also sometimes 'vertices'. Also I use them as synonym :) > > Are there other alternatives? > > > > Without looking at the documentation, I wouldn't know what > "junction" and "geometry" nodes are either. > > Yeah, probably :) > > > > Yes definitely! > > > I'd say that junction and geometry is more immediately descriptive > and intuitive, > > though the meaning of tower/pillar isn't really obscure. It would > seem a small but worthwhile improvement in comprehension/usability > > Okay, so I'll do the change (after waiting a week for vetos or other > suggestions) and properly document this stuff in the low level API: > https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/docs/core/low-level-api.md > and reference to this e.g. in the OSMReader etc > > Regards, > Peter > > On 01.12.2014 20:44, Jürgen Zornig wrote: >> >> Well, in GI science we speak of 'vertices' for pillars and just >> 'nodes' or 'junctions' for that what you know as tower nodes. Coming >> from GI I found it hard to understand what towers and pillars should >> be until I read some documentation about it. So by talking about >> vertices at least, it would get much clearer for.a whole bunch of >> geomatic related people. >> >> Am 01.12.2014 19:38 schrieb "D KING" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>: >> >> I'd say that junction and geometry is more immediately >> descriptive and intuitive, though the meaning of tower/pillar >> isn't really obscure. It would seem a small but worthwhile >> improvement in comprehension/usability. >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Peter <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> *To:* [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Monday, 1 December 2014, 16:01 >> *Subject:* [GraphHopper] What are pillar and tower Nodes? >> Rename to geometry and junction nodes? >> >> Hi all, >> >> as the naming is from 2 years ago I think it could be time to >> rename >> 'tower' nodes into 'junction' nodes and 'pillar' nodes into >> 'geometry' >> nodes. What do you think, would this be (more) intuitive? >> >> Below a quick documentation which I would add otherwise to >> the docs. >> >> Kind Regards, >> Peter >> >> ** >> From OpenStreetMap we fetch all nodes and create the routing >> graph but >> only a minority of them are actual junctions, which are the >> ones we are >> interested while routing. Those junction nodes I call tower >> nodes which >> also have a graphhopper node ID associated, going from 0 to >> graph.getNodes(). The helper nodes between the junctions I >> call 'pillar >> nodes' which can be fetched via >> edgeIteratorState.fetchWayGeometry >>
_______________________________________________ GraphHopper mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
