> Yes, my top row of pixels all represent the same geographical position
> (90 deg north on earth), but as you mention, on a Mercator projection
> it is ignored, so it shouldn't hurt
I didn't say it was ignored, I said the projection breaks down. We
don't know what internal algorithms the API use
Ooops, sorry for the double replies. Thanks for the feedback, Rossko.
Yes, my top row of pixels all represent the same geographical position
(90 deg north on earth), but as you mention, on a Mercator projection
it is ignored, so it shouldn't hurt (and in fact it doesn't). Though I
agree this is me
> Naturally
We only know what you tell us.
> I've tried to split the texture in two: [(-60, -180) (90,
> 0)] and [(-60, 0) (90, 180)]. It kinda works, but not consistently.
I'd be wary of latitude 90 too; (90,-180) (90,0) and (90,+180) all
represent just one point. Your overlays still have zero
On Nov 10, 9:34 am, Rossko wrote:
> > Is there a limit to the west/east bounds of a ground overlay ?
>
> -180 and +180 are exactly the same place. Logically, your overlay has
> zero width and cannot be seen. Perhaps you could break it into two
> hemispheres.
Indeed, geographically it represents
On Nov 10, 9:34 am, Rossko wrote:
> > Is there a limit to the west/east bounds of a ground overlay ?
>
> -180 and +180 are exactly the same place. Logically, your overlay has
> zero width and cannot be seen. Perhaps you could break it into two
> hemispheres.
Indeed, geographically it represen
> Is there a limit to the west/east bounds of a ground overlay ?
-180 and +180 are exactly the same place. Logically, your overlay has
zero width and cannot be seen. Perhaps you could break it into two
hemispheres.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"
