<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type> <META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18975"> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV>Actually I thought I was suggesting using longitude/latitude coordinates as a way to avoid the argument as to whether historical or more contemporary names were used by coding all name changes to the same coordinates, where possible..  When I changed the subject to place names (or soon after it changed to place names).  Could you be thinking of the thread that subsequently changed to this one?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I don't think this thread evolved and went off on a tangent, but so what if it did?  Some interesting discussions come up when the subject is altered along the way. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But as far as I remember it's been linked to coordinates since it changed to "place names" (and I'm sure I changed the subject line, but certainly someone will check the archives and set me square on that if I'm mistaken)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But it matters not to me.  I've personally learned a lot from the discussion about coordinates that I didn't know before.  I've some idea of some pitfalls and limitations from their use too, but I remain convinced it's simply a practical idea to make use of them where possible (and where practical).  I'd like to see their use increase, and see some guidelines for that use.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Larry</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=linda@fpr.com href="mailto:linda@fpr.com">linda@fpr.com</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=laboswell@rogers.com href="mailto:laboswell@rogers.com">LBoswell</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=janicemsj@gmail.com href="mailto:janicemsj@gmail.com">Janice Sellers</A> ; <A title=apgpubliclist@apgen.org href="mailto:apgpubliclist@apgen.org">apgpubliclist Posting</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 27, 2010 7:03 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [APG Public List] [APG Members] place names</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV>I don't remember the exact wording of the original question that started<BR>this thread, but it ran along the lines of asking the "best" way to<BR>record or "give" a place name, the-name-at-the-time-of-the-event vs<BR>current usage.   The GPS discussion does not address this original<BR>question, as far as I can tell.<BR><BR>I do agree that GPS descriptors are useful, etc.   But unless someone is<BR>suggesting that GPS replace textual geo-political place names, the<BR>original question is not being addressed.   <BR><BR>Linda<BR>____________<BR>Linda Gardner<BR>Massachusetts<BR><BR>> -------- Original Message --------<BR>> Subject: Re: [APG Public List] [APG Members]   place names<BR>> From: "LBoswell" <<A href="mailto:laboswell@rogers.com">laboswell@rogers.com</A>><BR>> Date: Wed, October 27, 2010 11:58 am<BR>> To: "Janice Sellers" <<A href="mailto:janicemsj@gmail.com">janicemsj@gmail.com</A>>, "apgpubliclist Posting"<BR>> <<A href="mailto:apgpubliclist@apgen.org">apgpubliclist@apgen.org</A>>, <<A href="mailto:apgmembersonlylist@apgen.org">apgmembersonlylist@apgen.org</A>><BR>> <BR>> <BR>> I don't understand any of the objections.  The coordinates are similar to <BR>> using a place name alone, except that when used in conjunction with a place <BR>> name they offer the added option of making it easier to get to the general <BR>> location.  They aren't going to explain boundary changes etc any more than <BR>> the place name did!<BR>> <BR>> Yet even if covering an approximate/general area they can be plugged into <BR>> other programs, mapping options, and much more in ways that historical or <BR>> modern place names can't.  And as was pointed out they offer a way of <BR>> differentiating between similarly named locations<BR>> <BR>> They're an "add-on" to everything you would normally do.  But a powerful <BR>> "add-on" if employed in a reasonable, intelligent manner.<BR>> <BR>> I think they should be added whenever possible.<BR>> <BR>> Larry<BR>>   ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>   From: Janice Sellers<BR>>   To: apgpubliclist Posting ; <A href="mailto:apgmembersonlylist@apgen.org">apgmembersonlylist@apgen.org</A><BR>>   Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 11:44 AM<BR>>   Subject: Re: [APG Members] [APG Public List] place names<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>   I think "boundary definitions + effective time period" is an important<BR>>   component of the GPS concept being discussed.  Many, possibly most,<BR>>   places do not have the same boundaries over time.  As an example,<BR>>   small communities are often annexed by large ones.  So, for instance,<BR>>   I live in Oakland, California.  If I were to include a general<BR>>   boundary GPS listing for Oakland as it is now, it would be much larger<BR>>   than Oakland was in the mid-1870's, when the section of the city in<BR>>   which I live was annexed.<BR>> <BR>>   Janice M. Sellers<BR>> <BR>>   On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:17 AM,  <<A href="mailto:linda@fpr.com">linda@fpr.com</A>> wrote:<BR>>   > I'm not sure I see how use of GPS coordinates has much impact on the<BR>>   > discussion of current vs historical place names. GPS descriptors are<BR>>   > an additional place qualification, and IMO they are very useful. Names<BR>>   > and their associated boundary definitions + effective time period and<BR>>   > the correspondence between then and now... all that is still important<BR>>   > as they have been.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>