On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:52:38 +0100, Eric Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So I believe a 3d environment in real time is the minimum starting >> point. So I could go to something like Second Life, but that lacks the >> scope and ambition of mirroring reality itself. > > Beware the follies of the 1:1 scale map! > > Maps convey meaning about reality that is something beyond information. > Adding more information (mirroring reality) does not necessarily convey > the > meaning. > > The problem of the red dot and the similar debate elsewhere about the > quality of "GIS maps" has to do with this lack of meaning. > > Humans are very good at communicating meaning (and arguably less good > about > communicating information). We are so good at communicating meaning that > this quality is often overlooked. Computers excel at communicating > information and there's a tendency among IT people to get so wrapped up > in > the information capabilities of the computers that they eschew meaning. Amen to all of that. Some excellent works that hit on this subject: Borges, J. L. (1946), "On Exactitude in Science" De Certeau, M. (1984), "The Practice of Everyday Life" any of the Situationist Internationalist works on Psychogeography (they were 'geohashing' - or at least using a mechanistic approach to move around in and experiencing space - about 50 years ago) Cheers, A -- Andrew Larcombe Freelance Geospatial, Database & Web Programming web: http://www.andrewlarcombe.co.uk : http://blog.andrewl.net email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] icq: 306690163 _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
