[uf-discuss] Geographic polygons [was geo - accuracy of coordinates

[Benjamin West]

Ah, that's interesting.  So geo covers most of the task by describing
the bounds of the image map, right?  In addition you may need a way to
describe the kind of projection used.  Is that kind of like tagging?

On 10/3/06, Kevin Marks <kmarks at technorati.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 3, 2006, at 1:12 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>
> > In message <FB2D8589-4A17-487D-8C8A-B4BCE0BC37B3 at placenamehere.com>,
> > Chris Casciano <chris at placenamehere.com> writes
> >
> >> Totally ignored the point I was trying to make... and that is that
> >> describing a border - of any shape - by the use of a collection of
> >> geo
> >> coords (at whatever precision) is a totally different task then
> >> defining an individual point and its precision.
> >
> > Totally ignored the point I was trying to make... and that is that it
> > would perhaps be better to have the capacity to describe a polygon.
>
> They aren't mutually exclusive, which is why I suggested separating
> polygons into a separate thread. There is an HTML way to express 2D
> polygons in image maps, so what we would need is a way to georeference
> the imagemaps to translate these back to earth-based co-ordinates.
>
> For imagery in lat-long space, or for close-in zooms, just specifying
> the lat/long of the corners would be adequate; for other projections
> such as Peterson, Roberts or Mercator, you may need to specify the
> transform with more care, if trapezoidal interpolation give significant
> distortion.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>