|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | Re: [gislist] TOOL or Science Re: topic change |
| Date: |
01/12/2007 12:55:00 PM |
| From: |
John Callahan |
|
|
I'm sure you are correct that some folks are tired of getting tool
questions, just as some folks are tired of getting GIS ethical,
philosophical, and every other type of post that comes across this
list. Personally, I love them all and I think this leads directly to
why so many of us are enamored with GIS in the first place.
Unless specifically restricted, a GIS list should interpret the "S" in
any way that's appropriate: Systems, Science, Studies, Services. These
are all completely valid interpretations yet each brings a different
(not unique) set of applications and methods with it. When asked what
does GIS stand for (which happens quite frequently to me), I usually say
that in the past it was an acronym for Geographic Information Systems,
but I have no idea what it stands for any longer. I like the thought
that it doesn't represent any one particular phrase. If I talk about
the software, I usually use GISystems. If I talk about social
implications or responses to GI, I usually use GIStudies. If I talk
about how and why GI is used and to what end, I usually just use GIS and
call it a day.
There could be separate lists for science vs tool posts, but that
quickly leads us to ambiguity (e.g., a response to a tool question has a
science-based answer: posts that fall in neither science nor tool
categories.) I enjoy the lists that include all types of postings, such
as this one. Since most people's introduction to GIS is through
software, most questions will be about the software. I don't foresee
that changing. The call should be made by the list owner. Whatever the
original intention of the list, that's the rules we should play by.
There are plenty of other lists with specific purposes you can join.
The science vs tool debate has always been very interesting. I guess
it's dependent upon how you treat the "S" in GIS. Science is itself a
methodology: a way to go about understanding a phenomena or resolving a
problem. Science is applied to many disciplines, especially to those
we call the "physical and life sciences" as the scientific methodology
has worked remarkably well there. Software, or any other technical or
other tool, also can be applied to many disciplines to achieve a better
understanding. Nearly any discipline or industry that involves
geography can benefit from BOTH the application of GIScience
methodologies and GISystems software. It's all about the "S" :)
GIScience and GISystems are both extremely important components to GI.
In today's world, you cannot have one without the other. If there's a
debate, maybe it's about what other people think you need to know?
Exactly what you need or want to know is as individual as each GIS
user. What others think you need to know, well, that's another story...
Have a great weekend!
- John
John Callahan
diodata@udel.edu
GIS Coordinator
University of Delaware
DickBoyd@aol.com wrote:
>
>In a message dated 1/11/2007 2:01:35 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
>dslamb@acewater.com writes:
>
>Perhaps the
>broader issue is that some folks are tired of getting tool questions,
>
>
>Tool questions are good, but specific software questions might best be
>answered by customer service of the providing company, in my opinion. Direct
>questions to the company can result in better quality control and better education
>on the specific tool.
>
>If there are a lot of questions on a data set or a lot of questions on a
>specific procedure, the supplier can develop a solution. If one person asks the
>questions there are maybe five others that have asked the same question and
>developed five different "solutions". And yet another ten that asked the
>question to themselves and decided it wasn't worth the effort to pursue further.
>And still another twenty with the same question waiting for someone else to ask
> for a solution. Asking a specific tool question at a general discussion,
>such as gislists/geocomm cuts the company out of the reporting loop.
>
>Perhaps the moderator can invite the companies to monitor this list. If a
>specific question comes up, the company can provide a link or contact the
>individual directly. Does this violate some type of non-commercial policy? Perhaps
>the software developers could post from time to time with the most popular
>questions?
>
>A weakness that I see in the way people ask questions is that the company
>FAQs are not all that clear on what topic is covered. A cursory search of FAQs
>results in no hits. So the question is submitted, in different words, and a
>new thread is started where a topic already exists.
>
>I don't know if quality would be considered in the "science" or tool
>c
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
