You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I used this in the implementation of a patch mapbox tilt view tile, where we invert the missing tiles under this tier based on the row and column numbers of the TileID, who probably looks like this:
But the computed tiles always return true when tested for collision with existing tiles, and in fact mathematically the co-edged tiles do intersect, but implementation-wise we might expect to reserve a certain amount of buffer.
An implementation that doesn't interfere with the existing logic is to support user-defined intersection and containment test functions, which is easy to implement, but requires some discussion.
Motivation
I used this in the implementation of a patch mapbox tilt view tile, where we invert the missing tiles under this tier based on the row and column numbers of the TileID, who probably looks like this:
But the computed tiles always return true when tested for collision with existing tiles, and in fact mathematically the co-edged tiles do intersect, but implementation-wise we might expect to reserve a certain amount of buffer.
An implementation that doesn't interfere with the existing logic is to support user-defined intersection and containment test functions, which is easy to implement, but requires some discussion.
Design Alternatives
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: