[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7150?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15216842#comment-15216842
]
Karl Wright commented on LUCENE-7150:
-------------------------------------
One problem at the moment is that all of geo3d works against a unit
sphere/ellipsoid, and uses units of radians. The Geo3DPoint does the same.
Argument compatibility would require that this be changed to degrees and
meters, and a common measure of earth radius be introduced.
Converting *everything* to degrees and meters is both unnecessary and unwise,
in my opinion. It introduces constants all over the place that really don't
add anything logically or numerically. But there are a number of shapes that
one creates now using radians, e.g polygons, circles, xyz solids, rectangles,
etc. Some of these use a builder-type metaphor which means multiple method
invocations are needed to construct the object.
So maybe it's possible, but non-trivial, to construct a wrapper around geo3d
for constructing objects? Seems like a lot of work for not much gain.
> geo3d public APIs should match the 2D apis?
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7150
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7150
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
>
> I'm struggling to benchmark the equivalent to
> {{LatLonPoint.newDistanceQuery}} in the geo3d world.
> Ideally, I think we'd have a {{Geo3DPoint.newDistanceQuery}}? And it would
> take degrees, not radians, and radiusMeters, not an angle?
> And if I index and search using {{PlanetModel.SPHERE}} I think it should
> ideally give the same results as {{LatLonPoint.newDistanceQuery}}, which uses
> haversin.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
