On 6/27/07, Paul Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Speaking of which, the more I think about it, the more I like Microsoft's "solution" to the problem of supporting both planar and polar coordinates, which is to just declare the one problem to be two problems, with both a "geometry" (planar) and a "geography" (polar) type. Means you don't have to do SRID lookups to figure out if you are geodetic or not, you can have completely different index types without any sort of magic switches hiding in the backend, etc. Really cleans up a lot of things.
I can see a lot of good reasons to separate polar and planar data table-types and the functions that operate on them. I guess a third type would be geocentric. But pray tell, why refer to it as "Microsoft's solution"? Rich -- Richard Greenwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.greenwoodmap.com _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list [email protected] http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
