----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I understand your point Alan, and it is well taken.  We will all see the
end of map publishing as we know it, and our jobs as arbiters of geographic/
spatial information will be a whole lot harder if we have not assured conduits
to the information.  I think many of us responded to the Draft Standards, Betsy
Mangan is on the working group and I think I for one feel comfortable with the
progress on that front.  GIS professionals are developing standards for creatin
a "title page" or "map legend" for the data.  If all goes well we will be able
to roll the SMD into our extent online systems.
 
This discussion is about more fundemental issues however.  The public's rights
to data and the library's role in distributing data.  As GPO reorganizes we
need to assure that the publics rights to spatial data not only remains intact
but is enhanced.
 
  ----------------------
  PATRICK MCGLAMERY
  MAP LIBRARIAN U-5M
  HOMER BABBIDGE LIBRARY
  UNIV. OF CONNECTICUT
  STORRS, CT 06268
  (203) 486-4589
  LIBMAP1@UCONNVM
 
 
 
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Alan says:
          I will conceed landfulls of computer generated paper.  That is
          not however my point.  For environmental analysis (show me all of
          the areas within a mile of Toxic Release Inventory sites that
          emit lead compounds with at least 25% minority population, for a
          simple example), the integration of multiple data sets is
          critical.  In principle this can be accomlished with paper maps,
          but the time required to do even that simple query--much less a
          dispersion model around TRI sites--makes electronic data sets
          much more useful.
 
          I work for the US EPA and with the USGS to develop meta-data
          documentation tools for ARC/INFO.  By academic training I'm more
          cartography than GIS; the workgroup includes a hydrologist, and a
          few other environmental scientist (although I don't know what
          specialties).  The meta-data standards that we work toward are
          not geared toward the needs of libraries so much as the needs of
          environmental scientists (how much trust can I put into someone
          else's data).  If the needs of libraries are different, then I
          would suggest is getting the meta-data information that is
          available on 130.11.51.187 via anonymous ftp and comment on it--
          otherwise you will be marginalized.  I don't mean this as a
          threat, but if the GIS/environmental sciences community that I
          work with thinks meta-data is important and we will meet our
          needs, even if we know of no one else's.
 
          I would also suggest _Toward a Coordinated Spatial Data
          Infrastructure for the Nation_ by the Mapping Science Committee
          of the National Research Council (ISBM 0-309-04899-0):
               "Rapid access to data and information is crucial to the
          economic, environmental, and social well-being of our global
          society....Today an ever increasing volume of these spatially
          referenced data are being produced, stored, transferred,
          manipulated, and analyzed in digital form.  Until now, maps in
          analog form have been a mainstay of a wide variety of
          applications and decision making. This is changing as more data
          and information on a wider variety of topics or themes (e.g.,
          population, hydrology, agriculture, climate, and soils) become
          available in digital format." Page One.
 
          Alan Brenner