Thank you to all who replied last week. I still have more questions (below)...
First, some of my reflections on the Manchester mapping party that ran over the weekend.I have now been out with a (borrowed)GPS and made a minor contribution to the map. I took a lot of photos as I wandered round what I now realise wasn't a particularly large part of a network of paths within a park, not really sure as I started out what was worth capturing and what might/not make a valid contribution to the map. So I tried to note everything: signposts, cafe's, (permanent)ice cream stand, phonebox, CCTV cameras, animal enclosures/pens within a farm area, open spaces, children's playground, a tunnel, small bridges crossing back and forth over a stream, historic buildings/ Blue Plaques (English Heritage)etc. And then my camera battery ran out, so I had to stop taking photos and start writing notes and taking waypoints. When I returned to the mapping party base, and watched the event organiser re-draw over the tracks, it was fairly satisfying to watch a blank space get filled in, albeit only a small amount.
The main difference in my mapping technique/ practice from that of many (perhaps the majority of?) people, as far as I can tell from the responses I have had via this diary, is that I did not go out mapping alone. I went out in a group of three. Two friends of mine from the University (one male, one female) and I (female) walked around the park together, each with a GPS, walking (for the most part) together and reflecting on the mapping activity and our surroundings as we went along.
So, as a result, we generated three, near identical tracks, with two of us taking the same or similar waypoints. What exactly was the point of this doubling, or tripling up of GPS tracks? Surely a waste of valuable mapping time that could have been spent covering a larger area of the park? Would that not have been a more productive use of our afternoon?
… 查看完整日记文章