Difference between revisions of "Talk:San Diego, California"
imported>Cahlroisse |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
The San Diego [[graticule]] should be 32, -117. However, this poses a problem as almost all of this graticule lies in the ocean or in mexico. One suggestion for fixing this issue is to offset the graticule by .5 in both latitude and longitude (i.e. 32.5, -116.5) so that more territory in the US is accessible, while still leaving the possibility of Mexican venues. On the other hand, we could just keep it pure and expect to find few in any people at the mexican or pelagic venues which would predominate. | The San Diego [[graticule]] should be 32, -117. However, this poses a problem as almost all of this graticule lies in the ocean or in mexico. One suggestion for fixing this issue is to offset the graticule by .5 in both latitude and longitude (i.e. 32.5, -116.5) so that more territory in the US is accessible, while still leaving the possibility of Mexican venues. On the other hand, we could just keep it pure and expect to find few in any people at the mexican or pelagic venues which would predominate. | ||
| − | [[Image:SanDiego-WrapMethod.jpg|thumb|202 px|A possible solution to wrap the coordinates into the three neighboring graticules on the east, north and northeast when the location falls off US soil.]] Another possible solution is to wrap over into the next graticule east when the location falls in the ocean and then wrap over to the two graticules north of those two when the location falls south of the border as seen in the illustration to the right. --[[User:Cahlroisse|Cahlroisse]] 05:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC) | + | [[Image:SanDiego-WrapMethod.jpg|thumb|202 px|A possible solution to wrap the coordinates into the three neighboring graticules on the east, north and northeast when the location falls off US soil.]] Another possible solution is to wrap over into the next graticule east when the location falls in the ocean and then wrap over to the two graticules north of those two when the location falls south of the border as seen in the illustration to the right. |
| + | --[[User:Cahlroisse|Cahlroisse]] 05:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm not sure "wrap" is the right word. You can just choose to visit the hash for a neighboring graticule! Or not! | ||
Revision as of 03:43, 24 May 2008
I agree. This also fixes things for us South-Orange-County-ers.
The San Diego graticule should be 32, -117. However, this poses a problem as almost all of this graticule lies in the ocean or in mexico. One suggestion for fixing this issue is to offset the graticule by .5 in both latitude and longitude (i.e. 32.5, -116.5) so that more territory in the US is accessible, while still leaving the possibility of Mexican venues. On the other hand, we could just keep it pure and expect to find few in any people at the mexican or pelagic venues which would predominate.
Another possible solution is to wrap over into the next graticule east when the location falls in the ocean and then wrap over to the two graticules north of those two when the location falls south of the border as seen in the illustration to the right.
--Cahlroisse 05:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure "wrap" is the right word. You can just choose to visit the hash for a neighboring graticule! Or not!
