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]>