[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Many-to-many: bad name
- To: Tuomas Lukka <lukka@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Many-to-many: bad name
- From: Benjamin Fallenstein <b.fallenstein@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:27:04 +0200
- Cc: zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx
- References: <Pine.HPP.3.96.1000820143832.12034C-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Tuomas Lukka wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Aug 2000, Benjamin Fallenstein wrote:
> > I think we need a general way of dealing with having multiple flobs a
> > flob could interpolate to, or multiple flobs that could interpolate to a
> > flob. There'll always be rasters which have that. It would make sense if
> > only one flob could interpolate to another one, and if the one whose
> > middle is closest is chosen.
> The flobpaths are intended for that but you're right: the nearest one
> might be better.
Think so: if it means moving a cell between different "contexts," well,
why not? Then the animation shows how holistic ZZ is. That's not bad at
> But there are also things like the compassraster which want to show the
> same cell several times.
Huh? That's exactly where we *need* this, so why the "but?" I mean, if a
cell is only shown once, we can't choose a "nearest," because there is
only one to choose from anyway?