Show HN: A5

What's the advantage of this over HEALPix projection? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HEALPix

The base platonic solid that Healpix is based on is the octahedron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octahedron), which A5 uses the dodecahedron(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_dodecahedron).

The octahedron has a much higher angular defect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_defect) than the dodecahedron, and thus when it is projected onto the sphere the cells are warped a lot. So while their areas may be the same, the shapes vary.

This article explains the geometric construction, and how it leads to the cells being a similar size and shape: https://a5geo.org/docs/technical/platonic-solids

Also from a data visualization point of view, the rectangular cells of Healpix (like S2) are arguably less pleasing to look at than hexagons/pentagons: https://h3geo.org/docs/comparisons/s2#visualization

I'm not sure about A5, but I do know that HEALPix cell boundaries are not geodesics, whereas S2 cells are always bounded by four geodesics.

A5 cell boundaries are geodesics. One more difference that I thought of is that HEALPix is generally not aligned with the continents (makes sense as it is mostly used for astrophysics), whereas the hilbert curve used to index A5 is aligned with the continental land masses: https://a5geo.org/examples/globe

As a result, when A5 is used as a spatial index, it will generally not have jumps in the cell index values when querying nearby locations on land

Not sure I understand—healpix starts from the rhombic dodecahedron and then bisects the generalizations of the 12 squares each time. Where do octahedra come into play?

My mistake, you are correct. The base solid is indeed the rhombic dodecahedron. I believe the point about the angular defect is still valid though.