[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7202?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15239406#comment-15239406
]
Jack Krupansky commented on LUCENE-7202:
----------------------------------------
Morton seems like more of a codec-level issue than an API - you still have
k-dimensions of coordinates, but they are simply encoded to a singe number for
each k-dimensional point. Maybe the implementation name finds its way into the
API, but the first issue should be what is logically being modeled - what kind
of points, like lat-lon, geospatial. or what. Presumably any can of
k-dimensional space can be Morton-encoded.
XYZ? That's fine for math-style axes, for things like 3-D CAD models and 3-D
printing, but seems inappropriate for a coordinate system intended to model
points on the surface of a sphere like the locations of places around the globe.
To me, "Geo" seems to be an accepted reference to modeling "geographical"
locations on the globe/planet.
How you model things like the location of a satellite or the space station is
another matter. Geosynchronous satellites simply have an elevation/altitude
above a surface point. Non-geosynchronous satellites have an orbit rather than
a location per se, although we can speak of their location (surface plus
elevation/altitude) at any given/specified moment in time. Ditto for aircraft,
which have a flight path and only momentary location at some altitude (although
a helicopter can maintain location for a longer moment.)
Besides geospatial surface points and 3-D CAD-style monitoring, which
real-world use cases are these modules intended to cover. IOW, how should
real-world users relate to them and choose from them?
> Come up with a comprehensive proposal for naming spatial modules and
> technologies
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7202
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7202
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: modules/sandbox, modules/spatial, modules/spatial3d
> Affects Versions: master
> Reporter: Karl Wright
>
> There are three different spatial implementations circulating at the moment,
> and nobody seems happy with the naming of them. For each implementation
> strategy, we need both a module name and a descriptive technology name that
> we can use to distinguish one from the other. I would expect the following
> people to have an interest in this process: [~rcmuir], [~dsmiley],
> [~mikemccand], etc.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
