2 messages.--------------------------------Johnnie
----------------------------------------------------
>Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 14:36:21 -0700 (PDT)
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: future of paper maps
Personally, I would do everything possible to retain any kind of paper
map collection. Digital access to materials shows every indication of
being yet another battle in an ongoing War of the Formats; the reality of
maps still starts from a graphic representation printed on any number of
materials which can be physically touched and seen. As digital
availablity of maps increases, and as new, unforseen formats are
developed, it seems to me that paper collections will increase in their
value and usefulness. I should say 'print' rather than 'paper', for as
paper itself is replaced by alternative synthetic products (such as Tyvek
- the incredibly durable material which is now the standard in providing
moisture barriers in house construction), paper maps will revert to
historical status but print format maps will be just as utilized and
valued. The same argument applies to books, of course. Our local
collection of State Archives currently does not accept any digital
materials as the technology to read it will probably be defunct in the
long term. Besides, anyone I've ever talked to on this subject still
vastly prefers print maps in the field and on the table - and they're not
just a bunch of romantic fogies - these are young students talking. With
all this 'mutability' over such an issue, ranging from practically stagnant
disinterest to high anxiety over what's coming in the future, can we
afford to replace foundational collections with formats which promise
convenience but might be short-lived? In my opinion, if a collection can
offer as many formats of relevant materials as possible, that's what the
(map) library of the future will be.
On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Isabel Kaplan wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> I've been asked this question, so thought I'd pass it on to a larger
> audience. Is there a future for USGS maps in print form or are there
> digital alternatives that can replace our paper collection now? "Yes" or
> "No" are not adequate answers, thank you. Can you give me your perspective
> on what's available in digital format that undergraduates or the general
> public might use in place of print 7.5' topos? Here at the University of
> Rochester we are contemplating moving our map collection (39 cases of 7.5s
> and at least 20 other cases) from one building to another. Space and
> dollars are always examined closely, hence the question about digital
> alternatives. How would YOU respond to your administration?? Thanks.
>
Brian P. Bach
Maps Specialist
Documents/Maps
Central Washington University Library
[log in to unmask]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 21:48:55 +0000
>From: Glenn Larson <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: future of paper maps
Isabel Kaplan wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Is there a future for USGS maps in print form or are there
> digital alternatives that can replace our paper collection now?
As an amateur user of maps I have been trying for about a year to find a
way I can use digital USGS topo's. I have leaned of the USGS DRG's.
This seemed to be the answer to my needs. USGS even provides freeware
to view them. I need to do just a little more. To use the analogy of
privately owning a paper map; I want to be able to draw my own traces,
symbols and notes on the digital maps. This requires software just a
little more capable than a simple viewer. So far I have found software
costing $500 and up that will do the job. That is considerably more
than I would like to spend to do the job. Perhaps with a more
digitally oriented map collection, the cost of software would come
down. In summary, don't give up on paper just yet.
--
Glenn Larson <[log in to unmask]>
|
