-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE:  Upside down maps
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:35:17 -0800
From: Virginia R. Hetrick <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: You Are Not Alone
<[log in to unmask]>

------------------
Hi, folks -

 From the perspective of one of your clients, it seems to me the term
"upside
down" is different from variants of the term "orientation" meaning south
is at
the top.   For example, I think of those maps you buy in Australia as
"upside
down" from my perspective.

But, if I get a map of a town in North America that's at the south end of a
box canyon and is oriented with south at the top, I don't think of that as
being upside down (I have one such collected on my travels in western South
Dakota during the middle 1970s -- map copyright date is 1975) because
the only
way to approach the town is from the north, thus the "top" of the map will
always give you the proper orientation, in my view.

After thinking about this for a while, I finally concluded that "upside
down"
is in relation to my idea of what is "rightside up".  My idea of
Australia is
that it should be sort of rough but relatively flat on the "bottom" with
a big
bite (or is that bight ;-) out of the top side, mainly because I've been
looking at it that way for about 55 years since I saw my first National
Geographic map with Australia on it at the age of 5.

I had no such preconceived notions about the town plan since I'd never been
there before (or since).

So, keeping Mr. Buffum in mind, the "upsidedownness" of a map is more a
searchable?) comment while orientation is more of a database field.

Dunno whether this furthers the discussion or not, but it's my sideways view
of the issue.  ;-)

virginia
--
\ /     Virginia R. Hetrick, here in sunny California
  0      Voicemail:  310.471.1766  Email:  [log in to unmask]
  Oo     "There is always hope."
         My health site:  http://www.yana.org/hetrick
         Site of the month:  http://www.washington.edu/cambots/camera1_l.gif