"Tobias Wendorff" <[email protected]> writes:
> Am Do, 17.12.2009, 23:40 schrieb Anthony: >> What's the definition of "rectangle" in non-euclidean geometry anyway? > > I can't answer this right now ;-) > > But since we've got projections which *are* actually good to show > rectangles with correct shapes and angles, it could be possible to find a > suiteable solution. My point was that Wyoming *is* a rectangle in a Mercator projection. This is because its borders are simply defined by parallels and meridians. Therefore, it would make sense to orthogonalize it using Mercator. I suspect that most areas of that scale that one could be trying to orthogonalize are defined in a similar way. Objects that are usually the target of actions like orthogonalize or align in cicle are much smaller (a few hundred meters at most). There the use of Mercator would only introduce small errors until one gets close to the poles. This is why these commands currently work reasonably well. Because most people work with Mercator. But, if one selects a different projection most of these geometry commands produce different results because they use the current projection. And this is why I started this thread. I think it would be better if Mercator was always used regardless which projection is currently active. This would be a simple change in the code. Matthias _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
