Moritz wrote: > While I'm not sure which of the to_angle descriptions I > prefer (in your version it is not unambiguously clear where > the angle is measured as I image that the 'to' feature is a > line, not a line segment)
However we word it, I expect adding a small graphic to the help page is ultimately going to do the best job of explaining it. > Here would be my go for both of them: > > "to_along;distance to the nearest point on 'from' feature > along linear feature, measured from 'start' point of that > linear feature;" sounds fine. (it really is from the start node of that line not the start of that line segment, right?) maybe add a note about v.build.polylines to the help page? > "to_angle;angle of linear feature at the point nearest to > point/centroid in 'from' map, counterclockwise from positive > x axis, in radians, which is between -PI and PI inclusive;" one of my goals was to have it be a brief description (goal < 60 chars!) not a full paragraph, which is why I tried to remove as many words as possible without letting it get too ambiguous. so: * "point/centroid in " isn't strictly needed * "positive x axis" -> "+x axis" * counterclockwise -> CCW * "which is " -> "" * In this context Pi is a proper name not a C macro or acronym, so the "I" is lowercased. otherwise '--help' on the command line looks crappy with the line-wrap. perhaps extending the indentation code could help that, but the art of concise technical writing is always good to practice. :-) the main bug was that it's not the angle of the line _to_ the nearest point, it's the angle _of the line_ at the nearest point. as long as that's clear+correct I'm not too worried about the exact wording of it, have fun. cheers, Hamish _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
