I've read all the comments here and still don't understand the rationale for hexagons as opposed to squares.
In every sense, squares seem to be much easier to reason about and easier to hierarchically partition than hexagons are.
There are certain advantages to hexagons in certain contexts, like six degrees of movement instead of four in board games, but I don't see how any of those advantages translate here for geographical indexing.
I'd love to understand why hexagons as opposed to squares in this context are a superior solution rather than unnecessary complexity?
In every sense, squares seem to be much easier to reason about and easier to hierarchically partition than hexagons are.
There are certain advantages to hexagons in certain contexts, like six degrees of movement instead of four in board games, but I don't see how any of those advantages translate here for geographical indexing.
I'd love to understand why hexagons as opposed to squares in this context are a superior solution rather than unnecessary complexity?