Guinevere, I agree 100%. Ten years ago, I would have probably argued against. Now I spend most of my time exploring how to communicate greater meaning through technology. We have several millenia of experience in communicating meaning through paper maps. We shouldn't lose sight of that experience as we are dazzled by technology.
But at the same time, folks like the Geowankers, are communicating new kinds meaning through technology without an understanding of cartography. My favorite example is the Scipionus.com site. It can be argued that because the Google API was so simple, it was easy for the creator to build that site. Human lives were directly impacted by communication facilitated through that site. The site functions based on geography - but it lacks any real conventions of cartography. It's my belief that the API - the methods used to build interactive maps - should be simple while allowing for semantic qualities to be carried through to the final product. I think the error lies in cartographers' view of how maps are constructed. The cartographer pulls the data together, selects symbols, and compiles the map (rather simplistic). But so much of the meaning that is carried by the map gets created as the cartographer actually puts pen to paper. More of this meaning needs to shift back to the data so when the average user grabs the data, the semantics come with it. The OGC Styled Layer Descriptor is a great example of how this can be done - but not many data publishers are bothering with this. And from what I've heard so far, SLD is partly broken and too complex. But that's just my 2 cents worth... -Eric On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Guinevere Harrison < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > K, speaking up for the humanities here... You can scramble to keep up with > changing technologies, but unless you understand human behavior in a > cultural and historical context, you're not going to be able to address the > latent needs, desires, and drives of real people. It's not about the shiny > interface or the shell or the program language—the most powerful ideas are > those that offer us new insight and create meaningful interactions for the > users. And those kind of ideas are not dependent on technology alone. > Developers and academics have much to gain from the other... it's a shame to > divide the camps. One more vote for open! > > Guinevere > > > > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking > -- -=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=- Eric B. Wolf 720-209-6818 PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
