|
|
|
|
|
by ramses0
583 days ago
|
|
This is super interesting! For data quality nerdery: "there's no such thing as a string (without an encoding)", "there's no such thing as a timestamp (without a timezone)", and apparently for geo-data: There's no such thing as a location (without a relative, timestamped, chain of reference points). eg: 38°53′52″N 77°02′11″W (the white house), but needs a timestamp (eg: continental drift, san andreas fault: https://geotripper.blogspot.com/2023/10/why-did-road-cross-s...) ..and if you're doing this RTK-stuff, you kindof need to know that "chain of custody": Here => There => GPS@time With GPS, we've kindof lost a lot of surveying / map-reading / orienteering in the general population, but looking at the guy trying to map out where the lines in the parking lot are to sub-millimeter accuracy really points out that it's inherently a relative (and time-fixed) process where the local _relative_ positions might not change really appreciably at all, but relative to GPS, over decades there'd probably be some skew (which could be "corrected", but only if you kept that original "chain of custody" of your measurements). |
|
What you're talking about is totally true though. And it's why defining land boundaries by GPS coordinates is not a good idea.