Peter,
Clearly, as we see a growth in cameras that geo-tag automatically we will see a significant rise in the use of geo-based services because the costs reduce to near zero while the benefits grow (because more people are doing it).
I (strongly) suspect that you are in a significant minority of people who geo-tag manually (though I admit I could be wrong?), presumably because the perceived costs are too high and/or the perceived benefits too low. (People finding it too costly to manually create metadata - now where have I heard that before?). In that sense, I'm the counter example to you - whilst I can be bothered to tag my images with things like 'bath' and 'uk' (and I can see the benefits in doing so, even given the fact that 'bath' is a *terrible* tag :-) ), I haven't yet found a compelling reason to manually geo-tag my images.
I certianly take James' point that, in an ideal world, being more explicit/precise is better than not. The same argument can be made about all metadata I suspect and much of my own work over the last 10 years or so has tried to move us in that direction. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world :-(
Andy
--
Head of Development, Eduserv Foundation
http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/
http://efoundations.typepad.com/
[log in to unmask]
+44 (0)1225 474319
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Repositories discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Nix
> Sent: 03 February 2009 14:07
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: DC:coverage- geo treatment by DRIVER
>
> The gazeteer to/from coordinates problem appears to be well
> on the way
> to poly-lingual solution. I've just put صنعاء and Сана
> (Arabic and Russian translit respectively, lest your mailer
> doesn't render them) into Google Earth, and both went
> directly to Sanaa (Yemen).
>
> There's information on the Google geo-coding and reverse
> geo-coding APIs here:
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Maps-API/web/resources-n
> on-google-geocoders
> which repositories software could, presumably, call upon.
>
>
> More personally, I've manually geotagged my photos with
> lat/long for several years. This camera:
> http://www.techshout.com/cameras/2008/09/nikon-introduces-cool
> pix-p6000-with-built-in-gps/
> has, like many mobiles phones, built-in GPS which tags
> photos as you take them.
>
> Apple's new consumer photo library software
> http://www.apple.com/ilife/iphoto/
>
> allows has an interface which facilitates quick and simple
> geo-tagging from place names without knowledge of actual coordinates:
>
> http://movies.apple.com/media/us/mac/ilife/iphoto/2009/tutoria
> ls/apple-ilife-iphoto-organize_your_photos_by_places-us-200901
> 06_r640-10cie.mov?width=640&height=400#places-placesTutorial
>
> It's also got a rather nice facial recognition tool:
>
> http://www.apple.com/ilife/iphoto/#faces
>
> Hope this helps,
> Peter
>
>
> On 3 Feb 2009, at 14:00, Pauline Simpson wrote:
>
> > Eventually, a Repository user/or depositor should be able
> to type in
> > London and a pop up (just like Flight bookings) will offer all the
> > alternatives maybe either as text or graphic, alongside coordinates
> > (or vice versa), I accept James point about naming differences in
> > gazetteers - but it has been ever thus.
>
|