I don't disagree with April's points; indeed, for historical purposes I
have every version of the Antarctic Digital Database that has been
published, though these are not available to the general public. I could
readily provide them for anyone who requires them! However, as you say,
it is not either/or, it is both/and. Of course we need the historical
backup of older maps (I am responsible as line manager for the curation
of the British Antarctic Map collection), and we need to retain the
history of our digital data. This is, of course, the weakness of the OS
model of data supply - as you say, there is an assumption that only the
most recent version is required. For most users, this is true, though.
Those doing historical research into maps and geography are as small a
user base as are my equally specialized users of Antarctic data. The
major users of map data require current data - the Building industry,
local authorities, leisure users and most others that I can think of
want to know what is there NOW, not in the past. I have several thousand
users of Antarctic map data; I can only recall a very small number who
were interested in change with time - and in those cases, I was very
happy to work with them to get what they wanted (both I and my
colleagues have published on coastal change in Antarctica). Anyone
wishing to use older data will require our input anyway; it is difficult
to distinguish between real change, lack of knowledge and inaccurate
mapping in Antarctica.
The reason for a controlled interface is very simple - it is very easy
for the untrained user to create a persuasive but completely misleading
map without such control! The user can select what layers are visible
and can zoom and pan to the area of interest, and can even obtain
further information about particular features - the functionaity is
greater than that of a printed map. All that the user requires is an
Internet connection and a web-browser; I forget the latest statistics,
but more than 50% of the population has access to these in the home;
given the availability of Internet access via public libraries, it is
available to 100% of the population.
Finally the complete freedom given to the more technical user is
available to anyone; free software is available that allows the user to
visualize the data, and the skills required to install and run it are
available to anyone with a modicum of IT knowledge - any school leaver
should be able to manage it these days.
What I am saying is simply that publishing printed maps is in many
cases simply not an economic option. Over the last few years, we have
only printed maps where we could be certain that there would be a
reasonable uptake, and we only have to cover the actual printing costs,
not the FEC of the map creation (which would have to include Antarctic
operating costs as well as the usual overheads). We actually do
distribute hard copy of other maps that are finished but not published
to other Antarctic Map libraries. However, in those cases it is far more
cost effective for us simply to do "print on demand" for users of the
maps.
Please don't think I am saying that printed maps are dead and gone - of
course they aren't ansd we need to maintain collections for all the
reasons you have stated. But in many if not most areas of map use,
digital information provides more flexibility and much added
functionality than any printed map can. I suspect that the true
successor to the OS maps we all know and love will descend from the
in-car GPS devices, rather than from the printed map.
Please don't burn me at the stake!
Paul
>>> [log in to unmask] 13 June 2006 13:06 >>>
All
I have to put an oar in here and I warn you that it will come down
closer to Dr Oliver's side!
Paul Cooper hits two crucial points in one sentence: "digital
provision
means that the user always has the most up-to-date information
available."
First, it is very short-sighted (no offence to Paul, all map
publishers
and dealers think this way) to assume that the user always wants the
most up-to-date information. In libraries and archives, the great
majority of our daily business is with people who don't want the most
up-to-date information, their interest is in historical information.
In
the early 1990s I attended a meeting of map librarians in the US where
the USGS representative proudly and with great fanfare announced that
the agency was now in a position to offer the very latest data in
digital format, with no mention of anything older than that. The
resulting "thud" as the jaws of the map librarians hit the floor
probably registered about a 5 on the Richter scale. Certainly, lots of
users want the most up-to-date information, but maintaining only a
digital database with no access to the older data (which passes out of
existence in the overnight satellite upload from field surveyors'
instruments) means there is no historical data for everyone else.
Second, exactly who is this "user"? It's only the very small and
privileged group of people who can justify access to the digital
provision. Sadly, this leaves a lot of people out in the cold (pardon
the Antarctic pun). Paul mentions an interface for the general public,
but also that it is fairly controlled, with only the technical
audience
being given the full functionality of digital data. And who has access
to OS's MasterMap? The Legal Deposit Libraries are working hard to
carry
forward the voluntary annual snapshot of LandLine Plus data into the
MasterMap age, but that's only six libraries; some people associated
with higher education can access it via Digimap; some people can
afford
to buy a small piece of it from an OS agent. What about everyone else?
Legal deposit of digital data is becoming the law, but until the nuts
and bolts are in place (still several years off) an entire generation
of
digital data is being lost to future users.
I admit that, despite my fascination with Google Earth, I still think
a
map on a piece of paper looks better than a map on a screen. Chris
Perkins once scolded me for only talking about paper maps; I scolded
him
right back for only talking about digital maps! There is not only room
for both, there is need for both. Most importantly, let's not forget
the
one crucial thing that paper maps have that digital maps don't yet
have:
longevity.
I'll get off the soapbox now.
April Carlucci
Cataloguing Manager and Curator of Modern Maps
British Library Map Collections
-----Original Message-----
From: A forum for issues related to map & spatial data librarianship
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of A Paul R Cooper
Sent: 13 June 2006 09:07
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: More interesting maps from north Devon
I guess that we have very different perspectives. However, my own
perspective is that we are moving more and more to a purely digital
means of distributing map data, with printed maps only being provided
in
cases where there is a justification for a particular sheet. That is
our
own position - we have data to provide a wide range of maps on demand
and do so for our users, but we only publish printed maps where we can
see a significant and ongoing demand. I see public access to maps
moving
in the direction of web accessibility of maps that the user can tailor
in various ways. I am providing access to Antarctic maps via this
means;
for the general public a fairly controlled interface is being provided
with controlled symbology and intelligent choice of data layers to
ensure appropriate choices for the scale of display; For the technical
audience I provide access to the digital features. Now, I would see
provision of a service like the former being a good use of the NIMSA
funding, and there are already moves in that direction. I suspect that
Google Earth willl move the OS in that direction faster! I think that
the funding of the OS in particular and mapping in general may also
have
to change in the medium term so that we use a service provider model
not
a publication provider model.
However, I think the tension between us will not go away, and the
debate is a healthy one! From your side, of course a printed map has
advantages, in particular that it can be provided at a sheet size not
usually accessible to the man (or woman) on the Clapham Omnibus. It is
also easier to use as a planning tool than the web offerings. However,
I
see these both as indicating the present immaturity of the technology,
not as a reason for not going down the digital route. And, of course,
the curatorial problems of digital data are very different from those
of
paper maps! From my side, digital provision means that the user always
has the most up-to-date information available, can manipulate it in
ways
that are useful to the user, and (best of all!) will not find that the
area of interest spans the corners of four maps!
There is room for both; as I implied above we provide digital
information, customized maps and printed maps. Each has its proper
audience; each provides different facilities; each has advantages and
disadvantages. However, it is unlikely that we will ever move back to
a
position where printed output is the leader with the others following
behind; it is more likely that we will print general, regional maps
and
keep the detailed information for other publication channels.
Best wishes
Paul
>>> [log in to unmask] 12 June 2006 22:00 >>>
Paul Cooper wrote:
> While I would agree with many criticisms of the OS, I am afraid I
can't
> agree with the "innovatorily stagnant" one! The OS is pretty much in
the
> forefront of providers of geographic information; has developed the
> Digital National Framework and from a data point of view is one of
the
> leaders in the field. Their adoption and promotion of the "TOID"
system is
> clearly a move forward in data management, and while it has
problems,
it
> is probably the way forward. However, most of this doesn't appear in
> published maps -
- and THAT is the nub of the problem. I agree completely with the
quality
of the database: but the sad fact is that the ordinary man and woman
in
the street - whose taxes finance an accountancy device called NIMSA
which
converts a 10 per cent shortfall in OS's operations into an apparent
operating profit - has to rough it with 1:25,000 and 1:50,000 maps
mostly
drawn at least 25 years ago, with no flexibility of output, and an
insult
to anyone of sensibility masquerading as a 1:100,000! OS must be glad
that
the Ramblers Association and Cyclists Touring Club are so busy with
rights-of-way and traffic law issues that they don't have time to
decry
this state of things!
I would be less indignant were it not that repeated promises of a new
generation of small-scale maps generated from the Landline/Mastermap
data
have so far come to nothing.
Richard Oliver
(Away for rest of the week)
--
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is
subject
to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email
and any
reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from
release
under
the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic
records management system.
**************************************************************************
Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book.
www.bl.uk/adoptabook
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
*************************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are
not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the
[log in to unmask] : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed
or copied without the sender's consent.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the
author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The
British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the
author.
*************************************************************************
--
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is subject
to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email and any
reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from release under
the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic
records management system.
|
