[Loadstone] Point type/class

slery slerythema at insightbb.com
Wed Apr 11 03:00:18 BST 2007

Rob and Monty,

Thanks so much for working to implement this.  We (users) have wanted this
because we do like the product and want it to fulfill our every need.
Notice the use of "want" and not "require" and we appreciate the fact the
you, the developers, are taking into consideration the things we are asking

  -----Original Message-----
  From: loadstone-bounces at loadstone-gps.com
[mailto:loadstone-bounces at loadstone-gps.com]On Behalf Of Rob Melchers
  Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 4:37 PM
  To: loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
  Subject: Re: [Loadstone] Point type/class

  Hi Teddy,

  Hmm, an interesting topic indeed and one that the last word has not been
spoken about yet. Still, semantics serve a purpose as long as they are
accessible and usable. I've designed the odd database in my time and see
them die, because users couldn't appreciate the complexity. Also your remark
'simple to use or to implement' is valid. We're dealing with a phone that
doesn't support the kind of database flexibility we should want, so like is
the case in electronics, psychology and philosophy, we shall have to find a
compromise. Having said thhat, if the need arises to create more dimensions
it's never too late. For the moment we want users to be able to download
POI's that adhere to a simple class description. If you're going on a
journey you will want to get the 'transportation' POI's, put them in a
seperate database and have them ready for use when you need them. If all you
need are railway stations, the type description will suffice to make a
database of stations. The same goes forr 'food', entertainment' and
'worship'. Like I stated, the list of classes is not yet what it should be
right now. This is a first attempt to come to some kind of classification,
lets see where a simple system takes us and then decide if augmentation is
called for.


  At 4/10/2007, you wrote:

    Hi Rob and all,

    ist. I also propose not to have sub-classes, although they sometimes
come to mind. Let's keep it as simple as possible.

    Do You mean simple to implement or to use?

    Follow this:
    A street is somehow the same as a flowing water. But still a highway is
diferent to a hiking path. So Flowing water and Street would be a Class in
Your modell.
    A Restaurant and a supermarket have much in common, when I'm hungry.
They should have a class like Food.

    so Streets, flowing Waterways and Food are thre classes.

    That makes no sence to me.

TO MUCH AND IN OTHER SITUATIONS TO LES: But a model with only two levels
comes to its end before it has started.

    Dont let us make the same mistakes as the professionals already made.


    Loadstone mailing list
    Loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.loadstone-gps.com/pipermail/loadstone/attachments/20070410/9939611f/attachment.htm 

More information about the Loadstone mailing list