Velocity Reviews > Bruce Hoult - your sig..

# Bruce Hoult - your sig..

Enkidu
Guest
Posts: n/a

 07-31-2005
Hi Bruce,

Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal
lat/long in your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do
the standard deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it,
but I'm lazy. <grin> ..and I wondered if there was a reason
behind it.

Cheers,

Cliff

Bruce's sig follows:

Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

Bruce Hoult
Guest
Posts: n/a

 07-31-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Enkidu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Hi Bruce,
>
> Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal
> lat/long in your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do
> the standard deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it,
> but I'm lazy. <grin> ..and I wondered if there was a reason
> behind it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Cliff
>
> Bruce's sig follows:
>
> Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
> Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

It's fewer characters for the same precision. I've given that down to
one ten-thousandth of a degree (11 m latitude, about 8 m longitude).
Minutes and seconds would be 3 times less acurate and take at least two
more characters. You wouldn't even know which house.

What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
with decimal minutes all in common use.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

Enkidu
Guest
Posts: n/a

 08-01-2005
Bruce Hoult wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Enkidu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Bruce,
>>
>>Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal
>>lat/long in your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do
>>the standard deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it,
>>but I'm lazy. <grin> ..and I wondered if there was a reason
>>behind it.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Cliff
>>
>>Bruce's sig follows:
>>
>>Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
>>Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

>
>
> It's fewer characters for the same precision. I've given that down to
> one ten-thousandth of a degree (11 m latitude, about 8 m longitude).
> Minutes and seconds would be 3 times less acurate and take at least two
> more characters. You wouldn't even know which house.
>

Even with seconds expressed to two decimal places, as Google
Earth do?
>
> What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
> with decimal minutes all in common use.
>

Ah, in answer to that, I've more often seen it in d/m/s. I
assumed that it was more or less standard.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

Enkidu
Guest
Posts: n/a

 08-01-2005
Enkidu wrote:
> Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> Enkidu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi Bruce,
>>>
>>> Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal lat/long in
>>> your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do the standard
>>> deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it, but I'm lazy. <grin>
>>> ..and I wondered if there was a reason behind it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>>
>>> Bruce's sig follows:
>>>
>>> Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
>>> Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

>>
>>
>>
>> It's fewer characters for the same precision. I've given that down to
>> one ten-thousandth of a degree (11 m latitude, about 8 m longitude).
>> Minutes and seconds would be 3 times less acurate and take at least
>> two more characters. You wouldn't even know which house.
>>

> Even with seconds expressed to two decimal places, as Google Earth do?
>>

Well it's pretty fuzzy where you live, and you are only a
couple of decimal points away from me.
>
>> What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
>> with decimal minutes all in common use.
>>

> Ah, in answer to that, I've more often seen it in d/m/s. I assumed that
> it was more or less standard.
>

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

Roger Johnstone
Guest
Posts: n/a

 08-01-2005
In <42eddd04\$(E-Mail Removed)> Enkidu wrote:
> Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
>> What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
>> with decimal minutes all in common use.
>>

> Ah, in answer to that, I've more often seen it in d/m/s. I
> assumed that it was more or less standard.

Most GPS receivers and electronic plotters use degrees/minutes/decimal
fraction of minutes. They probably use that because the NMEA data
interconnection standard uses it. Now, why does NMEA use it? <shrugs>

I suppose degrees and whole minutes gets you close enough for coarse
navigation (and was all that was practical before satellite navigation),
and the advantage of using a decimal fraction instead of using seconds
is you can just keep adding more decimal places on the end to improve
the resolution. Early GPS receivers only went to two dp resolution, but
most go to four now which is enough to place you within about 200mm (not
that a normal GPS is that accurate).

--
Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand
http://vintageware.orcon.net.nz/
__________________________________________________ ______________________
No Silicon Heaven? Preposterous! Where would all the calculators go?

Kryten, from the Red Dwarf episode "The Last Day"

Lawrence DčOliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a

 08-02-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Roger Johnstone <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I suppose degrees and whole minutes gets you close enough for coarse
>navigation (and was all that was practical before satellite navigation),
>and the advantage of using a decimal fraction instead of using seconds
>is you can just keep adding more decimal places on the end to improve
>the resolution.

Angular and time measurements use unit multiples of 60 rather than 10
because that's what the ancient Babylonians used. And they did it
because 60 gives you more integer divisors than 10 does. In particular,
10 does not divide by 3.

Jerry
Guest
Posts: n/a

 08-02-2005
Lawrence DčOliveiro wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Roger Johnstone <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>I suppose degrees and whole minutes gets you close enough for coarse
>>navigation (and was all that was practical before satellite navigation),
>>and the advantage of using a decimal fraction instead of using seconds
>>is you can just keep adding more decimal places on the end to improve
>>the resolution.

>
>
> Angular and time measurements use unit multiples of 60 rather than 10
> because that's what the ancient Babylonians used. And they did it
> because 60 gives you more integer divisors than 10 does. In particular,
> 10 does not divide by 3.

Neither does a megabyte