[uf-discuss] geo - accuracy of coordinates
chris at placenamehere.com
Mon Oct 2 15:16:38 PDT 2006
On Oct 2, 2006, at 5:58 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> In message <A919CF31-0EDC-4BB2-85B5-8BEC6CC7011F at lava.net>, Colin
> Barrett <timber at lava.net> writes
>>> Or the capacity to describe a polygon...
>> I call the 80/20 rule into effect here.
> Fine, I'm confident that more than 80% of countries, counties, towns,
> cities, gardens, parks, nature reserves, and industrial estates are
> polygons, and fewer than 20% are circles.
You could outline any territory as a series of geos if the need ever
arose. But I'm still not clear how we've gotten here. If I want to
say something is in Ireland, or Mexico City or somewhere in the Alps
I'd tag it as such. I thought the original issue of accuracy was one
of precision (either via tool measurement or in human recollection).
Not one of being able to define a "geo" that accurately represents
the floorplan of Yankee Stadium or the whole of Antarctica but of
accurately reflecting if a designation was accurate enough to make a
determination if a specific seat in yankee stadium, "somewhere in the
bleechers", or just "near the stadium as i was walking around before
the game" or "i need to mark the bronx somehow so left me zoom out
and drop a marker from the 50k foot view"
(Forgive me if I may have read more into the discussion due to my own
[ Chris Casciano ]
[ chris at placenamehere.com ] [ http://placenamehere.com ]
More information about the microformats-discuss