Hi, I lurk far more often than I post but here is my two cents on the topic.
>From Sean.Gorman > While I think neo's could benefit from the old work - I do not think it is > a prerequisite. *The work drew on the common language of mathematics and > most of the neo's I know have a very solid background, often times far > better than many modern geographers. * While I do think the gap between > neo and academic geography has been far over blown. I also think that the > friction is not only the fact neo's are often not geographers, but possibly > worse they embody the spirit of quantitative geography and what many current > geographers view as positivist science. >From Puneet Kishor > This is really a very thoughtful and completely spot-on response. > *Availability of web-based mapping tools makes me a > *-cartographer/geographer as much as the availability of a power saw > and drill makes me a *-carpenter. * There is a difference between the people who are *creating* the new geographic tools and the ones who are *using* them. Who of these two sets gets the title "neogeographer"? It would seem from the Where conferences that the people creating the tools are the ones with that title. They are creating tools for the masses who have not a clue about the geodesy, mathematics, and programming that went into creating the Google Earth spinny globe on the iPhone or Google Maps or all of the open source geographic (or otherwise) software out there. Or are my employeers, very well educated real estate professionals who can barely figure out how to add a marker to Google Earth to show their building locations for a virtual tour, the neo-geographers because they are using the new geography based tools? So who would the neogeographers, in the context of this panel, be? The creators of the tools or the mass users of the tools? Regards, Nif
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
