You'll want to get down to millimeter.
For one reason...There are already tons of public LIDAR datasets with point
data down to millimeter.
I've even seen monuments and public art sculptures that have LIDAR datasets
down to millimeter precision using WGS84 base references. (think knowing
the coordinates for George Washington's left nostril on Mount Rushmore
against trilateration references of WGS84 ... crazy I know, but its out
Having it all queryable in Wikidata ? hmmm... not for me, other data
catalogs and GIS systems handle that job.
But having the datasets linked etc. to spatial references ? You'll want
to ensure that folks can populate against a spatial reference property like
the City of Georgetown example link above that gives:
EPSG 2277 <https://epsg.io/2277>
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:19 PM Jan Macura <macurajan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 30 August 2017 at 22:29, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
True, but this probably won't be kept
up-to-date and most likely would
be useless for Wikidata users since random very precise data can not be
relied on unless there's a guarantee certain set of data (e.g. all
observatories) have the same accuracy and it is kept up-to-date.
Like in all the wiki-world, this should be guaranteed through the
reference claim, shouldn't it?
I think we should at least limit it to specified
precision (not the case
today) but maybe even more in case precision is too high. I don't think
anything beyond 1m is really useful - please provide use cases if you
I can't think of anything really useful right now... What I'm afraid of is
creating fake grids like it happened in DBpedia with too much rounding (see
, p. 44/45). Maybe with 1 m precision it won't happen today, but it
might in the future for very POI-dense areas.. (might it?)
Wikidata mailing list