<html><body name="Mail Message Editor"><br>On Jan 8, 2009, at 3:11:02 PM, "Gerald I. Evenden" <geraldi.evenden@gmail.com> wrote:<br><blockquote style="padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; border-left-width: 2px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: blue; color: blue; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: -webkit-monospace; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; ">My first problem is that unlike projections where I can imagine someone<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>processing untold millions of points in a data-in->data-out, I could not<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>image that usage in the case of geodesic information other than the two<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>interpolation operations I included. Secondly, the format of result of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>massive processing is difficult for me to predict.<br></span></blockquote>Note that ellipsoidal forms of oblique azimuthal equidistant, as well as a Cassini-Soldner projections and others, require computation of geodesics. What goes for projections, goes for geodesics, since the latter is likely to be deployed in the former.<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>— daan Strebe</div><div><br><div><br></div></div><div class="aol_ad_footer" id="uAED6F30012F741AD979162179D702CA8"></div></body></html>