The idea of neogeography is productive and attractive when it encompasses many ways of making geospatial viewpoints more broadly accessible to many kinds of users. When it repudiates or ignores much of the existing work it is in large part based upon (e.g. hijacking a term such as paleogeography which is already widely accepted and used for quite another purpose), it is a lot less attractive...
--Josh On Nov 24, 2008, at 1:11 PM, Christian Willmes wrote: > P Kishor schrieb: >> On 11/24/08, Eric Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>> So who would the neogeographers, in the context of this panel, >>>> be? The >>>> >>> creators of the tools or the mass users of the tools? >>> >>> I think there are two classes of Neogeographers: tool makers and >>> tool users. >>> >> >> The whole premise of this thread is (was) that Christian Willmes >> and I >> wrote against right in the beginning was that the world is not >> binary. >> >> > > Thank you Puneet! That is, what it is all about. > > Additionally, this whole discussion is in my mind SO not productive! > It > makes geographers as they known before now to paleogeographers(?!?) > and > geoweb users or hackers or internet geeks (who are mostly never known > before as geographers and additionally never would call them self > geographers) to neogeographers(?!?). > > Again, to what shall that discussion lead? > > best regards, > Christian > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
