<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi together,<br>
      <br>
      I've thought now long about this (maybe too long ;)) and I'll
      leave it as it is. The problem with "geometry"-node is that it
      refers to edgeState.fetchWayGeometry and we can get tower node
      geometry from this method too which might be confusing. The
      problem with "junction"-node is that end-standing nodes (in blind
      alleys) are no junctions.<br>
      <br>
      And so, I've just updated the documentation here:<br>
      <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/docs/core/low-level-api.md">https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/docs/core/low-level-api.md</a><br>
      <br>
      Regards,<br>
      Peter<br>
      <br>
      On 02.12.2014 09:20, Peter wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite="mid:547D7653.3090308@gmx.de" type="cite">
      <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Thank you all for your input!<br>
        <br>
        <br>
        > in GI science we speak of 'vertices' for pillars and just
        'nodes' or 'junctions' for that what you know as tower nodes.<br>
        <br>
        Vertices vs. nodes is not a choice as one uses 'nodes' in graph
        theory but also sometimes 'vertices'. Also I use them as synonym
        :)<br>
        <br>
        Are there other alternatives?<br>
        <br>
        <br>
        <div>> Without looking at the documentation, I wouldn't know
          what "junction" and "geometry" nodes are either.</div>
        <br>
        Yeah, probably :)<br>
        <br>
        <br>
        <div>> Yes definitely!<br>
        </div>
        <br>
        > I'd say that junction and geometry is more immediately
        descriptive and intuitive, <br>
        > though the meaning of tower/pillar isn't really obscure. It
        would seem a small but worthwhile improvement in
        comprehension/usability<br>
        <br>
        Okay, so I'll do the change (after waiting a week for vetos or
        other suggestions) and properly document this stuff in the low
        level API:<br>
        <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/docs/core/low-level-api.md">https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/docs/core/low-level-api.md</a><br>
        and reference to this e.g. in the OSMReader etc<br>
        <br>
        Regards,<br>
        Peter<br>
        <br>
        On 01.12.2014 20:44, Jürgen Zornig wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote
cite="mid:CA+HBZU+m5Bdmb9EDMVZjPdf3iugdt-uCns18fS-D1j+Dfmx0ww@mail.gmail.com"
        type="cite">
        <p dir="ltr">Well, in GI science we speak of 'vertices' for
          pillars and just 'nodes' or 'junctions' for that what you know
          as tower nodes. Coming from GI I found it hard to understand
          what towers and pillars should be until I read some
          documentation about it. So by talking about vertices at least,
          it would get much clearer for.a whole bunch of geomatic
          related people.</p>
        <div class="gmail_quote">Am 01.12.2014 19:38 schrieb "D KING"
          <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
            href="mailto:david.king.bath@btinternet.com">david.king.bath@btinternet.com</a>>:<br
            type="attribution">
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div>
              <div
                style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:garamond,new
                york,times,serif;font-size:8pt">I'd say that junction
                and geometry is more immediately descriptive and
                intuitive, though the meaning of tower/pillar isn't
                really obscure. It would seem a small but worthwhile
                improvement in comprehension/usability.<br>
                <br>
                <br>
                <br>
                <div>
                  <blockquote style="border-left:2px solid
                    rgb(16,16,255);margin-left:5px;margin-top:5px;padding-left:5px">
                    <div style="font-family:garamond,new
                      york,times,serif;font-size:8pt">
                      <div style="font-family:times new roman,new
                        york,times,serif;font-size:12pt">
                        <div dir="ltr">
                          <hr size="1"> <font face="Arial"> <b><span
                                style="font-weight:bold">From:</span></b>
                            Peter <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                              href="mailto:graphhopper@gmx.de"
                              target="_blank">graphhopper@gmx.de</a>><br>
                            <b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b>
                            <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                              href="mailto:graphhopper@openstreetmap.org"
                              target="_blank">graphhopper@openstreetmap.org</a>
                            <br>
                            <b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b>
                            Monday, 1 December 2014, 16:01<br>
                            <b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b>
                            [GraphHopper] What are pillar and tower
                            Nodes? Rename to geometry and junction
                            nodes?<br>
                          </font> </div>
                        <div><br>
                          Hi all,<br>
                          <br>
                          as the naming is from 2 years ago I think it
                          could be time to rename<br>
                          'tower' nodes into 'junction' nodes and
                          'pillar' nodes into 'geometry'<br>
                          nodes. What do you think, would this be (more)
                          intuitive?<br>
                          <br>
                          Below a quick documentation which I would add
                          otherwise to the docs.<br>
                          <br>
                          Kind Regards,<br>
                          Peter<br>
                          <br>
                          **<br>
                          From OpenStreetMap we fetch all nodes and
                          create the routing graph but<br>
                          only a minority of them are actual junctions,
                          which are the ones we are<br>
                          interested while routing. Those junction nodes
                          I call tower nodes which<br>
                          also have a graphhopper node ID associated,
                          going from 0 to<br>
                          graph.getNodes(). The helper nodes between the
                          junctions I call 'pillar<br>
                          nodes' which can be fetched via
                          edgeIteratorState.fetchWayGeometry<br>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
      </blockquote>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>