|
|
|
|
|
|
by ddoeth
633 days ago
|
|
|
> Is it? I'm no expert on parks, but surely some of them have borders along rivers. Many US states have such borders. Depending on the country, but Australia has some [1]. I still think that there is a set of polygons that can be used to describe this border. Not to argue against your point (I rarely get less than 4m of accuracy), but luckily > but anywhere else, the accuracy isn't that great, especially around buildings. GPS accuracy is terrible in cities. cities are (almost?) never in national parks. [1]: https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/-/media/npws/maps/pdfs/... |
|
|
Sometimes they are. See Washington, DC.
Anyway, the requirement is for determining if a photo was taken in a park or not. The resolution wasn't stated, however: just how accurate do we need to be? If I'm in a canoe in a river that borders a park, but the river isn't part of the park, but the shoreline a few meters away is, our algorithm might claim I'm in the park, when I'm really not. The requirement wasn't "somewhere near a park", but "in a park". Rivers change their courses over time, so some polygons aren't going to accurately describe this border.