Difference between revisions of "Talk:Trmrng"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: ~~~~ Initially I need to have an example why this should be used. In my opinion a range can be defined by the geometry. One thought further I see the point that we might have problems wi...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[User:Jens|jens]] 15:26, 18 March 2009 (CET) | [[User:Jens|jens]] 15:26, 18 March 2009 (CET) | ||
| − | Initially I need to have an example why this should be used. In my opinion a range can be defined by the geometry. | + | Initially I need to have an example why this should be used. In my opinion a range can be defined by the geometry. That works with the example provided in any way. |
| − | One thought further I see the point that we might have problems with information saying "Ranges between 50 and 70 nm". That is indeed difficult. This can be a fact to be addressed to TSMAD how they intent to handle such fuzzy areas. If they don't provide a workable solution than go ahead. Probably the definition can be renamed to enable us to use it for other fuzzy areas too, like "unspecified/unreliable area of service/concern" or something like this. | + | One thought further I see the point that we might have problems with information saying "Ranges between 50 and 70 nm". That is indeed difficult. This can be a fact to be addressed to TSMAD how they intent to handle such fuzzy areas. If they don't provide a workable solution than go ahead. Probably the definition can be renamed to enable us to use it for other fuzzy areas too, like "unspecified/unreliable area of service/concern" or something like this. And, we should amend the example as well. |
Revision as of 14:28, 18 March 2009
jens 15:26, 18 March 2009 (CET)
Initially I need to have an example why this should be used. In my opinion a range can be defined by the geometry. That works with the example provided in any way. One thought further I see the point that we might have problems with information saying "Ranges between 50 and 70 nm". That is indeed difficult. This can be a fact to be addressed to TSMAD how they intent to handle such fuzzy areas. If they don't provide a workable solution than go ahead. Probably the definition can be renamed to enable us to use it for other fuzzy areas too, like "unspecified/unreliable area of service/concern" or something like this. And, we should amend the example as well.