James S Reid wrote:
> Could somebody on the list shed some light on why the DRIVER guidelines
> state that for DC:Coverage the " Recommended best practice is to select
> the value from a controlled vocabulary (for example, the Getty Thesaurus
> of Geographic Names or TGN) and that, where appropriate, *named places
> or time periods be used in preference to numeric identifiers as*, for
> example, sets of co- ordinates or date ranges. If necessary, repeat this
> element to encode multiple locations or periods."
>
> This is at odds with what we have been encouraging for years (favouring
> explicit georeferencing via no-ambiguous coordinate referencing) as part
> of having the JISC IE georeferenced and indeed is guaranteed to provide
> ambiguity e.g. the placename 'london' is not non-ambigous were as N 51°
> 30' 30''W 0° 7' 31'' is (this is the UK London as opposed to the
> Canadian one at N 42° 59' 0''W 81° 13' 58' ).
I wouldn't call those coordinates non-ambiguous without the reference
ellipsoid or datum in use. It's likely to be "WGS 1984" for GPS-derived
data or perhaps "International 1924" for older materials.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_ellipsoid
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodetic_datum
cheers
stuart
>
> See also our GAP work -
> http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Geospatial_Application_Profile
>
> ??
>
>
>
> James S Reid
> EDINA (Geoservices)
> Uniiversity of Edinburgh
>
> tel:+44 (0) 131 651 1383
> mob: 0759 5116988
>
> "Walking down the road
> With a blade in your waist
> Johnny you're too bad, Johnny you're too bad"
>
> John Martyn 11th September 1948 - 29th January 2009
>
>
>>
--
Stuart Yeates
http://www.nzetc.org/ New Zealand Electronic Text Centre
http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/ Institutional Repository
|