| There is still a special place in my heart for UTM [0]. MapCodes seem to be based on a similar concept (grid, sub grid, sub-subgrid), but with a bit shorter representation. The thing that worries me about using mapcodes, however, is what seem to be the arbitrary borders, order of girds, and the up-keep required for usage. [1] There is nothing to stop us from creating shorter UTM Codes, though. Assume 0->33 represented by 0 0 0 0
ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789
Same as Map Codes [2]The CN Tower is at * WGS84: 43°38′33.24″N 79°23′13.7″W, (26 chars) * UTM: 17N 630084 4833438 (18 chars) * "Shortened" UTM: T.N.SBB6.DW9F8 (13 chars) * Map Code: CAN PYLK.XY8P [3] (13 chars) So I guess the utility of such a complex system is lost on me when something like UTM, that can be decoded with minimal effort, is just as good. [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Transverse_Mercator_c... [1]: http://www.mapcode.com/mapcode_documentation.doc [2]: http://www.mapcode.com/alphabets.html [3]: http://www.mapcode.com/getcoords.html?iso3=112&ifrom=aboutmc |
So that makes the difference between saying it to someone and having to write it down. Mapcode is massively shorter for local locations which is exactly what sat-nav is for.
The "grids" for mapcode are human-understandable - country and state.
I think a lot of HNers are thinking too much like programmers and forgetting that people need to tell each other locations and write them down. That's where mapcode is good.