On Jun 11, 2005, at 6/11/05 4:50 AM, Rex Brooks wrote:
> I happen to think that either a rule of thumb, or a specified limit
> to the number of lat/long points might serve to solve the problem,
> such that practitioners can automatically apply an optimization
> algorithm before sending a message.
Um. Well, reduction of geospatial polygons, either in a smoothing
mode or (more likely for alerts) in an "enveloping" mode, is
certainly a fact of life.
Still, I'm having difficulty with the idea that we would adopt a
format that roughly doubles the byte-size of each polygon, and then
ask senders to reduce the resolution of their data to compensate.
Seems like that might be a triumph of form over function, doesn't it?
Anyway, I'm not sure anyone is actually having a problem with the
existing polygon format, so are we in danger of trying to fix
something that isn't really broken?
- Art
