[Geowanking] RE: Geowanking Digest, Vol 21, Issue 10

Mon Aug 15 07:34:46 PDT 2005

I'll expand on that with comments made at OSG:

     1) Actionable metadata will continue to improve as software is  
able to create it automatically and act on it automatically. I  
include in this category automatically created attribution and review  
metadata which can actually be used to improve discovery, as well as  
the EXIF type of data creation documentation.

     2) Metadata which is not machine-actionable will always be  
difficult to create and maintain, for good reason.

Josh

On Aug 15, 2005, at 10:26 AM, michael gould wrote:

> Two comments. Goodchild is not a meta- but rather a full (PhDed)  
> geographer
> :-)
>
> And regarding the lack of metadata, "we" will fix that by building GIS
> clients that force metadata creation as the geodata are created or  
> analyzed.
> Just like your digital camera does (well, better!)
>
> -----------
> Michael Gould
> Department of Information Systems (LSI)
> Universitat Jaume I, 12071 Castellón Spain
> E-mail: gould (at) lsi.uji.es
> http://www.mgould.com
> http://www.geoinfo.uji.es
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: geowanking-bounces at lists.burri.to
> [mailto:geowanking-bounces at lists.burri.to] En nombre de
> geowanking-request at lists.burri.to
> Enviado el: sábado, 13 de agosto de 2005 18:01
> Para: geowanking at lists.burri.to
> Asunto: Geowanking Digest, Vol 21, Issue 10
>
> Send Geowanking mailing list submissions to
>     geowanking at lists.burri.to
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>     http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>     geowanking-request at lists.burri.to
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>     geowanking-owner at lists.burri.to
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Geowanking digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: no metadata (Chris Holmes)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 05:07:59 -0400
> From: Chris Holmes <cholmes at openplans.org>
> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] no metadata
> To: geowanking at lists.burri.to, Raj Singh <raj at rajsingh.org>
> Message-ID: <1123924079.42fdb86f6b95d at webmail.limegroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Quoting Raj Singh <raj at rajsingh.org>:
>
>
>> Sounds like human nature to me. People do as much work as they must
>> to satisfy their own needs--no one really gets properly rewarded for
>> creating metadata. So we're expecting them to do this instead of
>> going out for a drink, or going home to their families?
>>
>> Also sounds like an opportunity for a Web search firm...
>> 1. crawl all the geodata on the web (you're already kind of doing
>> this)
>> 2. have parsers for the major geographic data formats
>> 3. inspect the data and have clever auto-harvesting tools work some
>> metadata magic
>> 4. presto--a spatial data infrastructure
>>
> 5. Allow user input to the resulting metadata, to both comment on how
> good the metadata is (ebay/amazon rate this data and was this metadata
> useful to you?), and to contribute/fix errors in the metadata.  To
> remix an open source phrase - The person who understands and fixes the
> metadata is not neccessarily or even usually the person who created  
> the
> geo data.  Granted a later user won't be able to figure out all the
> metadata fields, but they can comment on the quality of the data, and
> how useful it was to them.  If you had enough people doing this you
> could get domain specific collaborative filters - how useful this data
> was to urban planners, or birdwatchers.  Indeed given enough eyeballs
> you may even get a co-worker of the person who created the data,  
> people
> who recognize a given dataset that they used to work with who could
> give a more informed opinion.  Granted to work really well there'd  
> need
> to be some drive by data aspect of it, but if the data can actually be
> accessed one can start to gather stats on the most viewed sets of  
> data.
>  And indeed with enough users I'm sure you'll get people who feel
> strongly one way or another about a dataset, and would be happy to  
> tell
> the world.  You could take care of the 'keyword' field by just taking
> the results of del.icio.us style tagging.
>
> 6. presto--the geospatial web (I've come to really dislike the term  
> SDI,
> after diving into the literature a decent bit.  It's an incredibly
> overloaded term, that means too many things to different people (many
> papers will start out with 5 definitions), and despite people moving
> the term to being more 'user-centric' and focused on 'process' it  
> still
> smacks of government and gis 'experts' are the ones who provide
> everything, they just should focus their results on users (who often
> seemed to be implied as government employees and other 'gis users').
> It's also not seen as a shared project - there's (in theory) a local
> SDI and a city SDI and a national one and a global one.  There's no  
> New
> York internet and Thailand internet - there should be one geospatial
> web, you're either on it, or you're not.)
>
> Chris
>
>
>>
>> Is this a crazy idea or not?
>>
>> --Raj
>>
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Mike Liebhold wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> A colleague, Anthony Townsend, and I had a long chat recently with
>>> meta geographer Michael Goodchild, from UCSB about this problem.
>>>
>>> Although a vast amount of digital geodata has been created over the
>>> last few degecades that might be potentially useful, a very large
>>> number of digital cartographers, working in the sciences and public
>>> and private sectors haven't been labelling their data - at all -
>>> with any identifying meta data, regardless of data formats ... and
>>> a large number of geodata collections and archives have no meta
>>> data describing the collections themselves of geodata, which may or
>>> may not include properly labeled geodata objects.
>>>
>>> So despite a more permissive policy of making geodata public
>>> accessable in the US, much is identifiable, but unsearchable data,
>>> and much is unidentifiable, though valid, all rendered useless
>>> without any descriptive narrative by cartographers or librarians.
>>> So, before public or private agencies can offer public access to
>>> potentially useful geodata in their collections, the data has to be
>>> rehabilitated, and the collections have to be described.
>>>
>>> Huge problems.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Geowanking mailing list
>>> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
>>> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geowanking mailing list
>> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
>> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: https://webmail.limegroup.com/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
>
>
> End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 21, Issue 10
> ******************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
>