Timeline for seeking "Available Sky" implementations
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2010 at 23:43 | comment | added | BlinkyBill | whuebr: When I was writing it up, I was thinking about a flat vs spherical polygon, and couldn't see any benefit to using a spherical, as from my perspective, we're just interested in the direct lines of 'view' from the GPS receiver out to space. The length of each make no difference to performance. I'd be very interested if you could explain the benefits of a spherical polygon, so that I can increase my understanding of the issue. | |
| Aug 27, 2010 at 15:33 | comment | added | whuber | Your first paragraph is identical to a suggestion in my answer, so I just want to note that it's important to treat this "skyline polygon" as a spherical polygon and to compute its spherical area. The approach in your second paragraph is excellent. It's actually how the ArcGIS "Solar Analyst" calculations are performed (using a gridded representation of the polygon rather than a vector representation). | |
| Aug 27, 2010 at 2:21 | history | answered | BlinkyBill | CC BY-SA 2.5 |