Talk:St. Louis, Missouri
From Geohashing
Revision as of 19:39, 12 July 2008 by imported>Histumness
Shouldn't the St. Louis graticule be 38, -90? 38, -91 is too far west and doesn't contain any of St. Louis, St. Louis county or even St. Charles or O'Fallon. Histumness 14:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- That may be a problem with the graticule template. I think the reference implementation shows the St. Louis graticule at 38, -91. --Space Cadet Dan 15:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Ohh okay. For some reason I was thinking the graticules were named by the northwestern coordinates. This way makes more sense though. Histumness 13:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- Now, this([google maps]) map shows the St. Louis graticule as 38,-91, but it is too far to the left. I'm not sure which is correct now. The graticule article does say each graticule is named by the southwestern ordinate, and I'm fairly sure 38,-91 is the southwestern point of the graticule that covers St. Louis. Any ideas? --Space Cadet Dan 18:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- It is named by the Southwestern point, but that map's rectangle is based on 38,-91 as the Southeastern point. I think that the map's rectangle is incorrect. However, the insert on the STL page shows the right rectangle, but only by using 38,-90 as the coordinates in the URL. - NerdDrew 14:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
- NerdDrew is right. 38,-91 is the southwestern point of the correct STL graticule. This can be verified by looking at this map. Since the wiki page says graticules are named by their southwestern coordinates, the STL graticule should definitely be 38,-91. However, I don't think that naming system is very good since it doesn't follow the implementation from comic #426 which shows you dropping everything after the decimal place of your current coordinates. To get that implementation to agree with the naming of graticules we would need to name them based on the southeastern coordinates for northwestern locations. This was noted in a comment by TLP on Talk:Main Page. Maybe we should wait until that issue is better addressed before we change anything? - Histumness 22:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- It is named by the Southwestern point, but that map's rectangle is based on 38,-91 as the Southeastern point. I think that the map's rectangle is incorrect. However, the insert on the STL page shows the right rectangle, but only by using 38,-90 as the coordinates in the URL. - NerdDrew 14:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
- Now, this([google maps]) map shows the St. Louis graticule as 38,-91, but it is too far to the left. I'm not sure which is correct now. The graticule article does say each graticule is named by the southwestern ordinate, and I'm fairly sure 38,-91 is the southwestern point of the graticule that covers St. Louis. Any ideas? --Space Cadet Dan 18:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- Ohh okay. For some reason I was thinking the graticules were named by the northwestern coordinates. This way makes more sense though. Histumness 13:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
For those that are interested, I will be at Saturday's meetup. It's on my way home, and I've never been to the Botanical Gardens before. I think this will be cool. I'll probably be really early since I work 5 minutes away and get off at 3. - NerdDrew 17:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- I am really going to try to make it too. I just got my GPS I ordered from Woot last week and my wife has never been to the botanical gardens either so maybe I will try to convince her to come as well. - Histumness 20:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- I really am sorry for doing this at such a last minute, however I don't think I'm going to be going today. I have to leave by 4:15 and for me to spend $12 for less than a hour at the Botanical Gardens is a little bit of a stretch. Especially since I've never been there and would like to spend more time enjoying the place if I could instead of going and running. Sorry. - NerdDrew 19:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
- No problem. I totally understand. I didn't realize they closed so early, so now I'm not sure if we want to go either. - Histumness 19:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
- I really am sorry for doing this at such a last minute, however I don't think I'm going to be going today. I have to leave by 4:15 and for me to spend $12 for less than a hour at the Botanical Gardens is a little bit of a stretch. Especially since I've never been there and would like to spend more time enjoying the place if I could instead of going and running. Sorry. - NerdDrew 19:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
