-------- 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