There you go. Another application.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Mike Carey <[email protected]> wrote: > AND: What if NASA wants to use us to store its database of crop circles? > :-) > > On 8/7/15 11:47 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Chris Hillery <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I've noticed that several geospatial serialization formats (at least >>> "well-known text" and GeoJSON) omit "circle" from their list of basic >>> geometric forms, even when they have numerous more complex types such as >>> multi-curves. This led me to here: >>> http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?23,148162,152625#msg-152625 >>> >>> which offers a reasonably compelling argument for why "circle" is not a >>> reasonable shape to discuss in geospatial contexts (loosely, because >>> there's no consistent way to map that to a spherical coordinate system). >>> >>> Actually, that argument is super-weak. It also implies that you >> shouldn't >> have lines (they aren't straight after projection) or squares (they aren't >> square after projection). But lines and squares both before and after >> projection are very handy. >> >> Circles are useful in many contexts. Drawing the visible horizon for a >> particular observer is a great example. The flight range of an airplane >> is >> another case. Positional error bounds with Gaussian errors is another. >> >> Yes. You can approximate it using splines or polygons. But you can >> approximate anything that way. >> >> >
