Sean, Back to the original question you posed - with the rapid expansion of any product or idea there are bound to be issues with the development of applications and I can see Mike's point having seen some horrendous 'hacks' myself, however it is also this rapid and uncontrolled evolution that has also been producing some of the most exciting examples of online GIS in this field as developers scramble to knit together emerging fragments of technology and resources, which have undeniably shifted the way in which everyone is looking at geo-based information.
Whilst Landon's example of the county surveyor does highlight the lack of technical knowledge by many of users, how many people would have been interested or have even known about the potential to utilise mapping applications in this way - the opportunity has been opened up to introduce people who would have previously been intimidated by the underlying technicality of GIS, so why not educate them and hear what they have to say (this applies to all types of users; scientists, joe blogs on the street, developers who don't have a geo based background). Now that geospatial information systems have caught the eye of global users hopefully it will awaken the imaginations of producers to provide some truly useful and flexible tools, remove the stigma of traditional GIS and encourage more users to explore the usefulness of mapping applications. The key to success will clearly rely on the agreement and adheration of universally accepted global standards rather than multiple organisations establishing and distributing their own, which hopefully the OGC can encourage and enforce. To brand neography(ers) as architects of these issues is unfounded. GIS is an ends not a means, whose failure can only be the result of an organisation or individual to implement a functional system with appropriate data and personnel, which can also be applied to the geophysics vs geography spilt of this thread (sitting in an organisation that deals with geophysics and geography I have seen this go both ways with each group of users). The current systems and solutions available out there are by no means perfect, so why not challenge them like Google have done? The effectiveness of any technology is as much about the human systems in which it is embedded and utilised – essentially, if users are not comfortable with a system they will not use it, and from here stems many of the problems with GIS - some of which are being opened up by the development of Neogeographic Information Systems. This is not to say the neographic systems should replace traditional GIS applications - the key is appropriateness! But I have to echo Mike Jones response on your blog posting Sean, although I would encompass it to all mapping --> "how can this not be great for GIS?" Surely this is why we love GIS and mapping - and if these applications are opening doors to new users then why are we complaining? It's all work, and it's getting increasingly interesting so why not enjoy it while it? Lucy Lucy Stanbrough Benfield UCL Hazard Research Centre Department of Earth Sciences Gower Street UCL London WC1E 6BT T: +44 (07834 860497) E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] W: www.benfieldhrc.org www.interragate.info -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 November 2008 21:30 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Geowanking] Geophysics vs. Geography: Why does one love geowanking and the other not so much? I would not normally spam the list with one of my own blog posts, but I'd love to get thoughts from the list on the topic. http://blog.fortiusone.com/2008/11/14/geophysics-vs-geography-divergent-viewpoints-on-the-geoweb/ In short it seems the geophysicists have really embraced geowanking type things - check out their special session on spinny globes: http://conferences.images.alaska.edu/agu/2008/index.htm Now compare this to Mike Goodchild's quote in the latest ArcNews: “In 2005, Google Earth was released, and people with little or no background in GIS, geography, or cartography began using it and other similar services to discover the power of map making. Some even began calling themselves neogeographers. Suddenly it was possible to do some powerful things with geospatial data without committing to what was often a difficult and lengthy learning process….But mistakes (by neogeographers) were and are being made, as often happens when powerful technology is put in the hands of people with little background in its underlying concepts and little experience in thinking critically about its products.” I have a lot of respect for Mike's academic work but this seemed a bit over the top. Any thoughts or response? best, sean _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
